recallreed blog

Cowlitz County GOP shows True Leadership...

2005-07-12T23:03:00.000-07:00

Breaking news: The Cowlitz County Republican Party of Washington unanimously passed the following resolution this evening and they are sending it to other 38 counties and to the state party.

R E S O L U T I ON 2005-2

Whereas, there are in the United States an unknown number of illegal immigrants estimated to be from 12 to 18 million; and

Whereas, there are in Washington State an unknown number of illegal immigrants estimated to be from 350,000 to 400,000 costing Washington State taxpayers millions in various government benefits intended for US citizens; and

Whereas, the failure of the Federal Government to enforce our immigration laws is creating a dangerous situation in which terrorists are given easy access; and

Whereas, there are other serious consequences of our present unchecked illegal immigration, and these include:

a. Providing an open door through which terrorists can easily enter our country,
b. Creating a bilingual country which could compromise our unity,
c. Encouraging disrespect for the law,
d. Placing a monumental burden on our welfare system,
e. Straining our schools by requiring instruction in two languages,
f. Depressing wages,
g. Displacing legal American workers,
h. Intensifying environmental problems,
i. Increasing the tax burden on American families; and

Whereas, polls repeatedly show that Latino-Americans, together with all other segments of American society, strongly support reform of this country’s immigration policy; and

Whereas, advocating reform would be a healthy confluence of doing what is right and doing what is politically wise; now therefore,

Be it Resolved by the Cowlitz County Republican Party, that this Party urges the Federal Government to move expeditiously to seal our borders against this flood of illegal immigrants, and to employ all practical and legal measures required to achieve this end, not excluding the erection of physical barriers and the use of military personnel; and

Be it Further Resolved, that no amnesty should be granted to illegal aliens, but that this country’s immigration laws should be enforced, and illegal aliens removed from the country in accordance with those laws; and

Be it Further Resolved, that the Cowlitz County Republican Party of Washington furnish copies of this Resolution to the Governor of Washington State, to the Washington State Republican Congressional Delegation, and to the President of the United States

"Recall Reed" files Appeal Brief in the Supreme Court

2005-07-11T21:42:00.000-07:00

Chris Vance and the GOP leadership did little more then carry out a $2.5 million PR campaign and when Judge Bridges ruled against the $2.5 million high-power GOP lawyer team, Vance FOLDED.

The Recall effort was ridiculed, written off, and buried. The fight has not ended; it has just begun. Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives -- ALL have had it with the leadership of both parties.

Call it what you wish but people are fed up, and the 420,000 signatures on the nonewgastax in 32 days prove it.

Political realities are shifting very fast.

"If the court decides to vacate the office, and a new election occurs, I will do everything in my power to ensure that the election is fairly administered under Washington State law and election rules. However, you should know that Washington State law does not provide me with the authority to call a special election or the authority to set aside election results certified by our county canvassing boards."

~ From: "Reed, Sam (Web)" sreed@secstate.wa.gov Sun, 20 Feb 2005

11 July 2005

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005/07/reed-recall-appeals.html

REED RECALL... APPEALS

Well, well Judge Chris Wickham Wicked is being stood up to.No, not by KVI and NoNewGasTax.com (yet), although The Seattle Times Editorial Board urges 'em too.But by Martin Ringhofer, Linda Jordan and the rest of the Reed Recall team. HERE in PDF format is the brief laying out the arguments for appealing Judge Wickham's wicked ruling. Not the least of which being Judge Wickham's suppression of relevant evidence (unlike Judge John Bridges in Wenatchee) and Secretary Reed's problems in making a good election happen.The PDF is well worth a read if you're as interested in election reform as I am. I'm happy to see somebody keep genuine heat on this issue... besides King County Councilor Reagan Dunn and his staff, that is!FYI: Martin Ringhofer is also the same gentleman who has been trying to stop dead people from voting!

Help STOP WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE of legal voters

2005-06-26T22:47:00.000-07:00

Go on record that you are mad as hell and you are not going to take it anymore

Monorail was approved by 800 votes. Were they legal voters?

WHO really won the last Governor's election?

Why is King County STILL sending out voter registration cards to DEAD people, after they PROMISED the citizens in May they would clean up their elections department?

What good is it to pay another expensive Blue Ribbon committee - as Ron Sims has hired - if King County doesn't intend to correct the problems?

How will we know who truly wins the next election in November?

Ron Sims is running for King County executive again ... Why would he ignore the current election department shortcomings , problems and security exposures unless it serves to help him during his upcoming race for King County Executive?

Go on record that you are mad as hell and you are not going to take it anymore.

Call and write Mike Siegel at KTTH, at 8AM every morning, until LOGAN is FIRED or RESIGNS and the holes in our voting systems and laws are plugged. KTTH Mike@MikeSiegel.com 206-726-6906.

Call and write Kirby and John at KVI Siegel at KVI, kwilbur@fisherradio.com
jcarlson@fisherradio.com Call-In Lines: King County: (206) 421-5757 or Toll Free: (888 312-5757.

Washington State Republicans have no backbone

2005-06-26T22:42:00.000-07:00

A Resolution was presented to the Washington State Republican Committee at their meeting held in Wenatchee a few weeks back. It was DEFEATED because the Republicans in power in this state have no backbone. They were afraid that the national party might not provide them MONEY in the future if they gave the President a slap in the face by passing this resolution.

Since they did not have the fortitude to pass this little resolution only supporting making the people more aware of the problem, it is doubtful they will support an initiatibe to the legislatur on the subject. The only way it could be done is if there were people like Russ and Dee in Alabama on the radio in Seattle. The Washington State Republican State Committee would not even take a vote to support the gas tax roll back drive. The Washington State Republicans have become a party of wimps, first class type.

Efforts are under way to present the resolution to ALL 39 County GOP Central Committees, and see what happens.

Resolution that was presented to the Washington State Republican Party

Whereas millions of illegal immigrants are infiltrating into our country each year and the number keeps increasing.

Whereas the border patrol and the INS are not capable of or do not wish to curtail this exodus of people illegally entering the country.

Whereas this illegal immigration problem has been identified for many years and very little seems to be done to address the issue.

Whereas a group of citizens have taken it upon themselves to patrol our border in Arizona and report to the border patrol any illegal activity.

Whereas the level of illegal activity has diminished significantly in the areas patrolled by these citizen “Minutemen”.

Therefore be it resolved that the Washington State Republican Party goes on record of supporting the efforts of the Arizona “Minutemen” to raise the national awareness of the illegal immigration problem.

There is something very wrong going on here...

2005-06-26T10:48:00.000-07:00

http://soundpolitics.com/
Posted by Deborah at June 25, 2005 11:26 PM

The media won't expose it. The courts won't rule on it. The local Attorney General won't investigate it. The Feds -(my buddies) - are simply watching...What in the Hell is going on??

The people of this state are being lulled into acceptance of the machine again - and it's not their fault! They've been waiting for someone to tell them what to do!

Right now - thanks to the luke-warm slap on the wrist from Judge Bridges, the media was able to help King County sweep most of their dirt back under the carpet! The media, is the vehicle most people depend on in this busy world, to get their information!

The blogs (especially SP) have been crucial in getting the word and truth out about the corruption in our state elections! But even the blogs can be as frustrating as talk radio when you are looking for fast updates and information! (am I the only one who pulls their hair out while listening to John Carlson? 8 million damn info-mercials and a 2 million topic teasers with only 1 minute of actual talk? ACK!)

Yes! King County and the rest of the Democrat controlled state is about to screw the people big time and there is very little we can do about it!

The only thing we can do is get the message out. We need to create a list of the history corruption in King County (elections, taxes, transit, CAO, etc...) and a list of the corruption in the state under the Democrats. We need to get this list into the newspaper and on TV. That will cost money and time is running out.

We need to launch an email campaign with the same information urging people to call the news channels, talk radio, newspapers, to complain about what is going on with our elections. Provide phone numbers!

We must use every vehicle available to turn this around. The media can't and won't ignore hundreds or thousands of phone calls.....

Stefan...what do you think we should do?

A petition for washington state election reform

2005-06-25T21:46:00.000-07:00

"Richard Daly and LBJ are laughing at the ctizens of Washington state from their graves!!!"

An appeal to our legislators and the election reform task force

196 people have signed this petition to date. I have posted some of the comments by supporters.

For the entire list, go:

http://www.petitiononline.com/wareform/petition.html

To: Washington State Legislature/Governor's Election Reform Task Force

As Americans our vote is the most precious thing we have. It is the currency with which we buy influence, and it is the only tool we have to direct our government. People not eligible to vote potentially nullify the votes of legal voters. This is serious, but our government is not taking it seriously at all.

We the people demand meaningful election reforms that protect the integrity of the system as well as the sanctity of our vote. We want every eligible voter to have the opportunity to vote, but we also want every vote cast to be a legal vote, and we expect the accounting of our elections to be accurate.

We the people of the state of Washington submit this proposal and this petition to you hoping you will implement these reforms.

Voter Education Reform:

o Promote voter responsibility by educating voters on voting procedure through school programs, and materials distributed at the time of voter registration.

o Emphasize voter responsibility by teaching voters that it is their responsibility to follow voting procedures correctly if they want their vote counted.

Registration Reform:

o Require all voters to re-register, and populate the new state-wide database with verified legal voters. o Require proof of ID by birth certificates or citizenship papers, rather than other documents which are easier to forge such as driver's licenses, that do not prove citizenship.

o Assign a PIN Number to each voter, to be used like the PIN # for a bank debit card, to verify the identity of the voter at the poll or to verify the identity of the absentee voter.

o Mail a verification letter to the voter at the address of residency. The voter must return this letter, providing his signature and PIN # for the registration to be validated.

o Require voting registration instructions to be printed in English, since reading English is a citizenship requirement and non-citizens are ineligible to vote.

Ballot Design and Accounting Reform:

o Provide a "None of the above" option in every race to eliminate under votes, and help clarify voter intent.

o Provisional ballots must be distinguishable from other ballots and must also be made in such a way as they cannot be fed into the machine at the poll.

o Account for Ballots from the time they are printed through certification of the election. Treat ballots as if they are dollars.

Ballot Casting Reform:

o Prevent Double Voting by immediately recording when a person votes and locking them out from additional voting.

Ballot Collection Reform:

o Train and test poll workers adequately to ensure they follow correct procedures.

o Establish a Chain of Custody for Ballots. If the chain is broken, the ballots are immediately placed in "provisional ballot" status for manual checking.

o Outlaw ballot enhancement by election workers guessing about voter intent.

o Timely absentee ballot collection through postmarking required on Election Day and receipt required within five days of Election Day. o Timely processing of overseas military votes by providing online voting or remote precincts.

Enforcement Reform:

o Require statewide uniform laws and procedures.

o Require officials to enforce existing laws.

o Prosecute illegal voters. o Restore voter confidence by making election information publicly available online, to include the list of registered voters, voting histories, ballot accounting and election return information, including write-in, over and under votes.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Dawn Courtney from Cowlitz:

"There's not one person I've spoken to that believes King County did everything on the up and up, in fact, they believe criminal activity has taken place. These problems have been around for a long time...it's time to clean it up NOW!!!"

DENNIS R COLE from SKAGIT:

"LET'S GET RID OF KING COUNTY UNELECTED POLITICIANS"

Josef Kunzler from Skagit:

"I think this is a sound platform of ideals that should already be in place. I am also willing to pay higher taxes, if need be, to implement these reforms."

Thomas (Bud) Dodgson from Island:

"Give us an honest election!"

Michael R Purcell from Kitsap:

"The election system is broken, let's get on with it and get it fixed."

Lee Eggebroten from King:

"Install security cameras to watch counters, add security at counting locations, do not allow counters to bring in bags or jackets."

TODD LIMBERG from CLARK:

"Politicians from both sides need to look at this. The average person looks at the reforms that are blatantly needed, which most of the politicians look the other way at, election after election. Working in the business world, most of these voter problems can be fixed with a little hard work and some modern technology. I think the most important thing is to have every one re-register to vote. I work with MS Access everyday and know that double registrations, etc can be purged. Also, voter cards need to NOT be given to illegal aliens that should not be fradulently given drivers licenses also. Steps need to be taken so that the average Joe feels that their vote is not being wasted. Also, voters should have to prove they actually live someplace and not have a phony address such as the Democratic headquarters in King County. That was real nice to pull on the people. Thanks King County, Erik Spencer Snohomish The number of votes should not exceed the number of registered voters, likewise when the margin of error exceeds the margin of victory serious questions MUST be asked and answered."

James Sorenson from King:

"King county said in 1998 they were going to fix this and never did. Lets do it now!!!"

Marcus P. Curd III from Kitsap:

"Richard Daly and LBJ are laughing at the ctizens of Washington state from their graves!!!"

Krystle Miller from Thurston:

"This sounds great! I am disgusted with the last election and this act might help!"

Jo Beaman from Yakima:

"It's situations like this that give voice to those who say they do not vote because it doesn't make a difference...Let's try to show them VOTING IS A PRIVILEDGE and RESPONSIBILITY of Americans...one vote DOES make a difference...it could by YOURS"

Lucille Diaz from Pierce:

"I believe that there was a manipulation of the votes in King County especially when I remember hearing Christine Gregoire throw her tantrum following the second recount results in which she maintained she would be the next governor. I only wish some of the stations would do a replay of this tantrum."

Mickie L. Postier from Mason:

"We need these reforms immediately to prevent voter fraud. We need to have honest and fair elections with results we can rely on. Please act now."

Mark R. Postier from Mason:

"Stop fraudulent elections. There should be no room for cheating. Please act now."

John Henebry from King:

"This is our most fundamental right and I am sick of politicians who cheapen it with "acceptable amount of error."

Dead People Can Still Vote In King County…

2005-06-25T11:09:00.000-07:00

Saturday, June 25, 2005

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/

HEADLINE: Dead People Can Still Vote In King County…

TODAY – KING COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 4 – LARRY PHILLIPS’ DISTRICT, KING COUNTY: In a stunning reminder of what “a total mess” King County Elections is, Martin Ringhofer again received voter registration cards for his dead parents after he contacted King County Elections about their current status as profiled in the 8 January 2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer HERE. These cards were part of the King County Elections attempt to “keep King County’s voter rolls accurate”.

In fact, King County Elections said in their press release about these voter registration cards:

Countywide mailings are the primary tool election officials use to receive information about voters who have moved. For this process to work, election officials depend on voters’ help.

“This effort really is a partnership with the public.” said Sherril Huff Menees, assistant director of Records, Elections and Licensing Services. “Addresses, names and signatures change over time and a countywide mailing like this is a chance for voters to get their most current information to us before the fall election season begins.”

Last summer following the countywide mailing, election officials received more than 120,000 returned registration cards with information about deceased voters and changes of addresses.

“As a responsible voter, if you receive a postcard for someone else, write ‘addressee moved, return to sender’ and drop it in the mail. Voters need to do their part to keep King County’s voter rolls accurate,” said Huff Menees. “The September primary is too important to miss simply because we can’t find your new address.”

Yet last summer – and several other times before, Martin Ringhofer contacted King County Elections telling them to strike his parents’ names and addresses from the voter rolls.

He said, “It is really beyond the pale that Dean Logan would send new voter registration cards to anyone who has been DEAD for nearly nine years. This adds new meaning to there being an afterlife after dying. Quite frankly, it is astonishing that such a thing is even possible.”

For obvious reasons, Ringhofer thinks that between this incident, the findings of a “culture of fear that dissuades employees from informing their supervisors of problems or offering solutions to them” and “Ineffective implementation of critical operational controls and quality assurance processes that identify and address inevitable human errors before they undermine the elections process” in The Webster Street Memo/The King County Independent Task Force on Elections Draft Initial Findings of the Task Force's Committees, and the many other “troubling” incidents in King County Elections in recent years such as more votes than voters and vote-by-mail materials mailed without a ballot – the King County Council should bring to an immediate vote King County Councilman Reagan Dunn’s Resolution of “No Confidence” in Dean Logan (filed in LegiSearch as 2005-0219).

Ringhofer says, “Aside of the implications for holding honest elections, it is cruel and abusive that I should be receiving yet new voter registration cards for my dead parents. It is not funny; I am not laughing; and Dean Logan has to be brain-dead to go on the airwaves and promise the public that he has fixed the voter registration problems. I sure would like to hear from anybody who can explain how this is possible. How much of this must we put up with before Dean Logan is FIRED, or prosecuted?”

EXCERPT VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS BY HONORABLE JOHN E. BRIDGES: Chelan County Auditorium, Wenatchee, Washington on the 6th day of JUune, 2005

2005-06-07T21:20:00.000-07:00

“This Court is not in a position to fix the deficiencies in the election process that we heard about in this courtroom over the past nine days. However, the voters of this state are in a position to demand of their executive and legislative bodies that remedial measures be instituted immediately. And clearly, the evidence here suggests that the problems require more than just constructing new buildings and
hiring more staff.”

“Mr. Logan in his testimony in court and, more particularly, in his deposition testimony referred to the culture he found when he assumed the responsibilities of the Director of Elections in King County. Almost anyone who works in state or local government knows exactly what this culture is. It's inertia. It's selfishness. It's taking our paycheck but not doing the work. It's not caring about either our fellow workers or the public we are supposed to serve. It's not taking responsibility. It's refusing to be held accountable. And so it is the voters who should send the message.”

WASHINGTON TAXPAYER AND CITIZEN PROTECTION ACT

2005-06-07T17:32:00.000-07:00

The following Referendum to the Washington State Legislature will be filed with the Secretary of State within the near future. Your comments, suggestions and revisions are solicited.

A REFERENDUM MEASURE RELATING TO THE WASHINGTON TAXPAYER AND CITIZEN PROTECTION ACT

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Washington:

Section 1. Short title

This act may be cited as the "Washington Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act".

Section 2. Findings and declaration

This state finds that illegal immigration is causing economic hardship to this state and that illegal immigration is encouraged by public agencies within this state that provide public benefits without verifying immigration status. This state further finds that illegal immigrants have been given a safe haven in this state with the aid of identification cards that are issued without verifying immigration status, and that this conduct contradicts federal immigration policy, undermines the security of our borders and demeans the value of citizenship. Therefore, the people of this state declare that the public interest of this state requires all public agencies within this state to cooperate with federal immigration authorities to discourage illegal immigration.

Section 3. Registration form

A. The form used for the registration of electors shall contain:

1. The date the registrant signed the form.

2. The given name of the registrant, middle name, if any, and surname.

3. Complete address of actual place of residence, including street name and number, apartment or space number, city or town and zip code, or such description of the location of the residence that it can be readily ascertained or identified.

4. Complete mailing address, if different from residence address, including post office address, city or town, zip code or other designation used by the registrant for receiving mail.

5. Party preference, if required by election laws.

6. Telephone number, unless unlisted.

7. State or country of birth.

8. Date of birth.

9. Occupation.

10. Indian census number (optional to registrant).

11. Father's name or mother's maiden name.

12. The last four digits of the registrant's social security number (optional to registrant).

13. A statement as to whether or not the registrant is currently registered in another state, county or precinct, and if so, the name, address, county and state of previous registration.

14. A statement that the registrant is a citizen of the United States.

15. A statement that the registrant will be eighteen years of age on or before the date of the next general election.

16. A statement that the registrant has not been convicted of treason or a felony, or if so, that the registrant's civil rights have been restored.

17. A statement that the registrant is a resident of this state and of the county in which the registrant is registering.

18. A statement that executing a false registration is a class 6 felony.

19. The signature of the registrant.

20. If the registrant is unable to sign the form, a statement that the affidavit was completed according to the registrant's direction.

21. A statement that if an applicant declines to register to vote, the fact that the applicant has declined to register will remain confidential and will be used only for voter registration purposes.

22. A statement that if an applicant does register to vote, the office at which the applicant submits a voter registration application will remain confidential and will be used only for voter registration purposes.

23. A statement that the applicant shall submit evidence of United States citizenship with the application and that the registrar shall reject the application if no evidence of citizenship is attached.

B. A duplicate voter receipt shall be provided with the form that provides space for the name, street address and city of residence of the applicant, party preference and the date of signing. The voter receipt is evidence of valid registration for the purpose of casting a ballot to be verified by each County Auditor.

C. The state voter registration form shall be printed in a form prescribed by the secretary of
state.

D. The county auditor may establish procedures to verify whether a registrant has successfully petitioned the court for an injunction against harassment an order of protection and, if verified, to protect the registrant's residence address, telephone number or voting precinct number, if appropriate, from public disclosure.

Section 4. Verification of registration

A. Except for the mailing of sample ballots, a county auditor who mails an item to any elector shall send the mailing by nonforwardable first class mail marked with the statement required by the to receive an address correction notification. If the item is returned undelivered, the county auditor shall send a follow-up notice to that elector within three weeks of receipt of the returned notice. The county auditor shall send the follow-up notice to the address that appears on the general county register or to the forwarding address provided by the United States postal service. The follow-up notice shall include a registration form and shall state that if the elector does not complete and return a new registration form with current information to the county auditor within thirty-five days, the name of the elector will be removed from the general register and transferred to the inactive voter list.

B. If the elector provides the county auditor with a new registration form, the county auditor shall change the general register to reflect the changes indicated on the new registration. If the elector indicates a new residence address outside that county, the county auditor shall forward the voter registration form to the county auditor of the county in which the elector's address is located. If the elector provides a new residence address that is located outside this state, the county auditor shall cancel the elector's registration.

C. The county auditor shall maintain on the inactive voter list the names of electors who have been removed from the general register for a period of four years or through the date of the second general election for federal office following the date of the notice from the county auditor.

D. On notice that a government agency has changed the name of any street, route number, post office box number or other address designation, the county auditor shall revise the registration records and shall send a new verification of registration notice to the electors whose records were changed.

E. The county auditor on or before May 1 of each year preceding a state primary and general election or more frequently as the auditor deems necessary may use the change of address information supplied by the postal service through its licensees to identify registrants whose addresses may have changed. If it appears from information provided by the postal service that a registrant has moved to a different residence address in the same county, the county auditor shall change the registration records to reflect the new address and shall send the registrant a notice of the change by forwardable mail and a postage prepaid preaddressed return form by which the registrant may verify or correct the registration information. If the registrant fails to return the form postmarked not later than twenty-nine days before the next election, the elector shall be removed from the general register and transferred to the inactive voter list. If the notice sent by the auditor is not returned, the registrant may be required to provide affirmation or confirmation of the registrant's address in order to vote. If the registrant does not vote in an election during the period after the date of the notice from the auditor through the date of the second general election for federal office following the date of that notice, the registrant's name shall be removed from the list of inactive voters. If the registrant has changed residence to a new county, the county auditor shall provide information on how the registrant can continue to be eligible to vote.

F. The county auditor shall reject any application for registration that is not accompanied by satisfactory evidence of United States citizenship. Satisfactory evidence of citizenship shall include any of the following:

1. The number of the applicant's driver license or non-operating identification license issued after October 1, 1996 by the department of transportation or the equivalent governmental agency of another state within the United States if the agency indicates on the applicant's driver license or non-operating identification license that the person has provided satisfactory proof of United States citizenship.

2. A legible photocopy of the applicant's birth certificate that verifies citizenship to the satisfaction of the county auditor.

3. A legible photocopy of pertinent pages of the applicant's United States passport identifying the applicant and the applicant's passport number or presentation to the county auditor of the applicant's United States passport.

4. A presentation to the county auditor of the applicant's United States Naturalization Documents or the number of the Certificate of Naturalization. If only the number of the certificate of naturalization is provided, the applicant shall not be included in the registration rolls until the number of the certificate of naturalization is verified with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service by the County Auditor.

5. Other documents or methods of proof that are established pursuant to the immigration reform and control act of 1986.

6. The applicant's bureau of Indian Affairs card number, tribal treaty card number or tribal enrollment number.

G. Notwithstanding subsection f of this section, any person who is registered in this state on the effective date of this amendment to this section is deemed to have provided satisfactory evidence of citizenship and shall not be required to resubmit evidence of citizenship unless the person is changing voter registration from one county to another.

H. For the purposes of this section, proof of voter registration from another state or county is not satisfactory evidence of citizenship.

I. A person who modifies voter registration records with a new residence ballot shall not be required to submit evidence of citizenship. After citizenship has been demonstrated to the county auditor, the person is not required to resubmit satisfactory evidence of citizenship in that County.

J. After a person has submitted satisfactory evidence of citizenship, the county auditor shall indicate this information in the person's permanent voter file. After two years the county auditor may destroy all documents that were submitted as evidence of citizenship.

Section 5. Procedure for obtaining ballot by elector

A. Every qualified elector, before receiving his ballot, shall announce his name and place of residence in a clear, audible tone of voice to the election official in charge of the signature roster or present his name and residence in writing and shall present one form of identification that bears the name, address and photograph of the elector or two different forms of identification that bear the name and address of the elector. If the name is found upon the precinct register by the election officer having charge thereof or the qualified elector presents a certificate from the county auditor showing that he is entitled by law
to vote in the precinct, the election official in charge of the signature roster shall repeat the name and the qualified elector shall be allowed within the voting area.

B. Any qualified elector who is listed as having applied for an early ballot but who states that he has not voted and will not vote an early ballot for this election or surrenders the early ballot to the precinct inspector on Election Day shall be allowed to vote.

C. Each qualified elector's name shall be numbered consecutively by the clerks, with the number upon the stub of the ballot delivered to him, and in the order of applications for ballots. The election judge having charge of the ballots shall also write his initials upon the stub and the number of the qualified elector as it appears upon the precinct register. The judge shall give the qualified elector only one ballot and his name shall be immediately checked on the precinct register.

D. Each qualified elector shall sign his name in the signature roster prior to receiving his ballot, but an inspector or judge may sign the roster for an elector who is unable to sign because of physical disability, and in that event the name of the elector shall be written with red ink, and no attestation or other proof shall be necessary. The provisions of this subsection relating to signing the signature roster shall not apply to electors casting a ballot using early voting procedures.

E. A person offering to vote at a special district election for which no special district register has been supplied shall sign an affidavit stating his address and that he resides within the district boundaries or proposed district boundaries and swearing that he is a qualified elector and has not already voted at the election being held.

Section 6. Verifying applicants for public benefits; violation; classification; citizen suits

A. An agency of this state and all of its political subdivisions, including local governments, that are responsible for the administration of state and local public benefits that are not federally mandated shall do all of the following:

1. Verify the identity of each applicant for those benefits and verify that the applicant is eligible for benefits as prescribed by this section.

2. Provide any other employee of this state or any of its political subdivisions with information to verify the immigration status of any applicant for those benefits and assist the employee in obtaining that information from federal immigration authorities.

3. Refuse to accept any identification card issued by the state or any political subdivision of this state, including a driver license, to establish identity or determine eligibility for those benefits unless the issuing authority has verified the immigration status of the applicant.

4. Require all employees of the state and its political subdivisions to make a written report to federal immigration authorities for any violation of federal immigration law by any applicant for benefits and that is discovered by the employee.

B. Failure to report discovered violations of federal immigration law by an employee is a class 2 misdemeanor. If that employee's supervisor knew of the failure to report and failed to direct the employee to make the report, the supervisor is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.

C. This section shall be enforced without regard to race, religion, gender, ethnicity or national origin. Any person who is a resident of this state shall have standing in any court of record to bring suit against any agent or agency of this state or its political subdivisions to remedy any violation of any provision of this section, including an action for mandamus. Courts shall give preference to actions brought under this section over other civil actions or proceeding pending in the court.

Section 7. Severability

If a provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.

FIRE NICK HANDY

2005-06-06T20:24:00.000-07:00

http://orbusmax.blogspot.com/2005/06/more-eff-statements-on-election-trial.html

Monday, June 06, 2005
MORE EFF STATEMENTS ON ELECTION TRIAL - FIRE NICK HANDY

EFF calls on Secretary of State to fire elections director

The Evergreen Freedom Foundation today called on Secretary of State Sam Reed to fire Nick Handy, Director of Elections. The call came as a result of Handy’s testimony at the ongoing election contest in Chelan County.

“Despite being the state’s elections chief, he demonstrated a marked ignorance of election laws, and testified under oath that he actively worked to publicly discredit the Republican case in the governor’s election challenge trial,” said Bob Williams, EFF President.

In a letter to Reed, Williams requested that Handy be fired because, in part:

He testified that pre-certification voter crediting was not mandatory; however, after being shown the Washington Administrative Code, he reluctantly admitted that the law does require absentee ballots to be credited prior to the counting of provisional ballots.

He sent an email to the Secretary of State’s contract attorney, which expressed a desire to undermine the Republican’s legal claims.

He then convened a council of election officials, agreed on talking points to counter the crediting issue, and sent them to all 39 auditors to present a united front. Testimony at trial, however, has shown that the crediting discrepancy does have a substantive basis, and should have been investigated.

By law, Handy must ensure “each county auditor had the most recent version of the election laws of the state,” including four emergency regulations issued in August 2004 to implement the federal Help America Vote Act. Despite his office issuing the regulations, he showed no awareness of their existence during his testimony and failed to send them to auditors prior to the election.

For months, EFF has been saying that despite repeated claims of neutrality by the Secretary of State’s office, it has been actively working against a meaningful investigation of the 2004 election.

“Nick Handy’s testimony on Wednesday vindicates EFF’s assertion that the Secretary of State’s office has been more concerned with protecting election officials than with investigating the election results,” Williams said. “Handy asserted that the election system is an ‘honor system’ and that mistakes are just human errors by an overworked staff. That’s an attitude incompatible with maintaining clean elections.”

Mr. Handy is a long time friend of Secretary Reed, as well as a contributor to his campaign. However, he has no experience in elections prior to his appointment as State Director of Elections.

EFFWA.ORG ISSUES STATEMENT ON WA GOV ELECTION TRIAL

2005-06-06T20:07:00.000-07:00

http://orbusmax.blogspot.com/2005/06/effwa.html

Monday, June 06, 2005
EFFWA.ORG ISSUES STATEMENT ON WA GOV ELECTION TRIAL

Statement from Bob Williams

President, Evergreen Freedom Foundation

Concerning Governor's Election Contest Ruling

"A court should only overturn an election when there is clear and compelling evidence that either fraud or gross incompetence and negligence occurred to such a degree that the apparent results cannot be trusted. While we disagree, apparently Judge Bridges believes the Rossi camp fell short of meeting that requirement.

"EFF strongly endorses Judge Bridge's opening comments. The Judge found that at least 1678 illegal votes were cast in the election, however the GOP failed to show that these illegal voters voted in the governor's race and for whom they voted.

"Judge Bridges said the court was not in a position to fix the deficiencies that were heard during the trial - that could only be rectified the voters. He said, 'the voters are in a position to demand of their legislative and executive bodies that remedial measures be instituted immediately.'

"EFF will take that charge very seriously.

"Listening to the testimony by county auditors of the errors in their counties during the 2004 election was appalling - it is hard to believe the fundamental disregard for election laws on reconciliation, certification, rovisional ballots, etc. and the covering up of massive discrepancies, particularly in King County.

"Election officials need to be held accountable with real consequences for violating the laws.

"Essentially Judge Bridges ruling renders the election contest statute meaningless. It is impossible to prove how illegal voters voted. Further, unless the law is changed it sets the state up for voting fraud, particularly ballot stuffing in the future. Once fraud occurs, then the losing candidate will have to prove the fraud by clear and cogent evidence and prove who the illegal voters voted for. That is an impossible standard given ballot secrecy laws.

"This trial demonstrated clearly an alarming ignorance of election law both by state officials who are tasked with implementing and enforcing it, and by local officials charged with the responsibility for carrying out the law. The level of incompetence and misfeseance in the Secretary of State's office is truly appalling.

"The cavalier manner of the King County elections department goes to the root of a corrupt culture where the law is flouted, clear warnings of impending disaster are ignored and legitimate errors are covered up rather than corrected. We also have seen a "circle the wagons" mentality on the part of many elections officials around the state who, while they profess fairness and transparency in the voting process, are even now moving in the direction of more closed doors and backroom procedures in their flight to a vote by mail system that is rife with opportunities for greater shenanigans in the future.

"EFF will continue to seek a federal grand jury investigation into the 2004 elections, not only in King County but elsewhere as well.

"It should be more than obvious to members of the State Legislature that the band-aid approach they took to election reform during the last session is not enough to address the systemic problems we face. "We need to have a complete re-registration of all voters in the state of Washington, with proof of identification and proof of citizenship, to weed out ineligible felon voters, the dead, and those who have registered to vote illegally.

"We must pass legislation requiring meaningful proof of identification both at the polls and when voting by absentee ballot. We have to provide proof of identification in Washington now when we go to by cold medicine. The least we can require is proof of identification before allowing people to vote.

"We need to make certain that the Secretary of State's office issues the 53 WACs it still hasn't issued on election procedures, training elections officials on their requirements and then enforce them in the next election cycle.

"EFF's position from the beginning has been that regardless of the election challenge outcome, Washington needs to engage in a complete reform of the elections process. Judge Bridges hinted that he agrees with us, particularly with his reference how Washington has gone overboard in its efforts to make voting as easy as possible without adequate safeguards.

"The Judge said, 'Extraordinary efforts are in place to make it easier to vote. But unfortunately I fear that it will be much more difficult to account for those votes in the future.'

"He is absolutely correct, and his argument should be kept in mind by all of those elections officials rushing head-long into instituting complete vote-by-mail systems in the future. It is a dangerous path.

"The evidence in this trial re-enforces our position that complete election reform in Washington is required sooner rather than later, and EFF will continue to work for that outcome."

Right is RIGHT and Wrong is WRONG: Recall Reed on Today's Development

2005-06-06T19:59:00.000-07:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005/06/recall-reed-on-todays-development.html

Monday, June 06, 2005

Below is the statement from the Reed Recall ringleader Martin Ringhofer: (Orbusmax on Orblog blogs THIS EFF statement calling for election reform in the wake of today's tragedy and THIS statement calling on Secretary Sam Reed to fire Nick Handy.)

Nobody believes the outcome of the last gubernatorial election outcome: Democrats or Republican. For that matter, partisan politics has NOTHING to do with it.

The people in Arizona overwhelmingly voted for an initiative for 100% voter re-registration. The numbers are running 57% of the registered voters are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

The outcome of the GOP challenge in Wenatchee County is unacceptable and points only to the corruption in our electoral process, specially in King County. Logan, Handy, Reed, Gregoire, and all the rest of them, are all celebrating together today.

Recall Sam Reed is in the State Supreme Court on Appeal, and the media has hidden this news from the people. Our case holds the key to the mess we find ourselves in, as the whole problem was kick-started by Sam Reed certifying an election which was fraught with fraud.

There is no reason whatever that we, the people, ought not be able to FLUSH ALIENS from the illegal voters list. None. There is ample evidence in our Recall Reed case to warrant the court to allow us to go forward and collect nearly 700,000 signatures to force a recall vote of Sam Reed.

You tell me if you ACCEPT the election debacle and the court's refusal to correct the fraudulent outcome, in spite of the Judge's admission nobody knows WHO won the election.

No response tells me you have given up, and wrong or right means nothing to you anymore. If that is the case, I can't blame you, as that is exactly how it all makes me feel -- except that at least I have written this piece to get the load off my chest.

Live long and prosper.

Open Letter to King Councilman Steve Hammond

2005-04-11T22:40:00.000-07:00

April 11, 2005

Mr. Steve Hammond
King County Councilman,

I heard you on the radio a while back talking about a "tradition" auditors used to have where they would file a discrepancy report with their canvass of votes if any errors had occurred during the election with ballots, machines, or at the polls. That is not a tradition it was and IS the law. It is called a narrative. In the narrative the auditor and canvass board SHALL reconcile one vote to voter or one ballot to one mistake until all errors are reconciled. This has to happen prior to certification and before they send their results to the Secretary of State. (WAC 434-262-070-090)

The Secretary of State, Sam Reed, is prohibited by law from accepting an incomplete canvass of votes from a county. A canvass is considered incomplete if there were errors and there is no narrative reconciling the errors. Reed is compelled, by LAW, to send the canvass back, over and over, until the canvass report is complete. The Secretary of State cannot accept a counties canvass or abstract of election returns without the required information and seal.

No county's certified copy of the abstract of votes shall be considered as complete for acceptance by the secretary of state until all of the material required by statute and regulation has been received by the secretary of state. (WAC 434-262-070 through 100)

King County's canvass report contained no narrative reconciling the errors; in fact I still don't think they have submitted one. Before Reed certified the election he was on public record acknowledging the numerous errors and discrepancies that had occurred in King County, so much so that he said he sent an employee to King County to check it out. “ In addition to the approximately 1,800 votes county officials can't account for, [Dean] Logan [Elections Director for King County] said up to 348 voters improperly put provisional ballots into counting machines at polling places before their signatures or eligibility had been verified.” (‘New error found in vote tally’ January 11, 2005, Seattle Times)

“But the issue of mismatched numbers in King County came as a surprise to him [Secretary Sam Reed]. And while he said some discrepancy is not unusual as counties reconcile records after an election, the number in King County is large enough that he sent a staff member to investigate.”(‘Doubts linger as Gregoire win certified’, Seattle Times, 12/31/04)

As a King County resident I am asking you, as a King County councilman, to write Secretary Reed and ask him why he accepted an incomplete canvass report from King County when he was forbidden by law to accept it without the narrative report reconciling the errors?

Why did Reed violate the law in order to accept the King County canvass? Why did Dean Logan get away with having, what 1,800 to 3,000 more votes than voters in his canvass, with no reconciliation? If there is an “informality” in the returns of any election, the Secretary can certify a race but only if it can be determined “with reasonable certainty” who actually won. (RCW 29A.60.130) Many certifications submitted in this election by counties to the Secretary had major defects, not small ones, but even if you tried to say all the defects were simply informalities Secretary Reed still could have not certified the governor’s race because he could not say with reasonably certainty who won the race. Take a 129-vote margin and add 1,800 more votes than voters in King County alone and that does not equal any kind of certainty.

This illegal activity and sloppiness has gone on long enough and under Reed's watch. On February 13, 2003 Secretary of State Sam Reed released a review of King County Elections (Secretary of State Report on King County) It noted problems with; computer programs (pg.26), procedures for operating equipment used to count ballots (pg.26), mailing of absentee ballots (pg.27), improving internal communication (pg.27). The report told King County what it should do to correct these problems. The Secretary concluded “The problems that surfaced in King County during last years [2002] election cycle threatened the fundamental right to vote,” said Reed. “The citizens of this state are counting on King County to embrace change, implement solutions and administer successful elections in the future.” (Exhibit 19 ‘Secretary of State Releases Review Of King County Elections’ February 13, 2003)

Despite this, King County ran amuck again in the November 2, 2004 election cycle. Felons voted, the dead voted, 343 provisional ballots were commingled with regular ballots, ballots that once were lost were found and it was not a spiritual event it was an illegal act, 1,800 more votes were counted than people who voted in King County alone, and to top it off absentee ballots were mailed late again. The Seattle Times reported that less than a month before the November election, the U.S. Department of Justice threatened to sue Washington State because it was moving too slowly in mailing military ballots overseas. At that point Washington was the only state that hadn't mailed its overseas ballots. (‘Feds threatened suit over military ballots’...January 10, 2005)

You must find out from Reed himself, why he violated the law in order to accept an incomplete canvass report from King County. The buck stopped with him and he let us down, he let you down. Please let me know if you will do this. We deserve to know why our Chief Election Officer so clearly violated the law.

Sincerely,

Linda Jordan
recall@comcast.net

Martin is simply attempting to do what Sam won't do

2005-04-06T01:26:00.000-07:00

April 5. 2005
Letter to the Seattle Times
by Linda Jordan

Your editorial writer Joni Balter tried, but she will never be able to tar and feather Martin Ringhofer as "racist", "nasty", or a man who is "engaged in a despicable witch hunt". ('A nasty turn in election challenge' 4-5-05) Why? Because he is none of those things.

The Secretary of State, Sam Reed, has refused to purge our voter rolls of illegal aliens. Martin is simply attempting to do what he won't do. Without access to Social Security and INS computers his only option was to look through the hundreds of thousands of names, by hand, and pull the ones that sounded foreign, like his name. Ringhofer.

Martin is a naturalized citizen from Austria. He dreamed about becoming an American and he did not cheat in order to accomplish that goal. He arrived with his parents in 1965, waited five years to apply for citizenship, studied hard, took the test and in1972 he became an American. He voted that year too. Funny thing, he had to prove he was a citizen before they would let him vote and he was happy to do it.

I find that people who are citizens by choice quite often have a deeper understanding and appreciation of American democracy. They look at voting as an almost sacred right and duty.

Thats Martin. He understands that the right to vote is a cornerstone of our great country and he wants to protect it.

Election Challenge Paradigm Shift

2005-04-06T01:20:00.000-07:00

It is "beyond" offensive to find out that elected and appointed governmental officials are not following the laws -- i.e. elections officials not undertaking the process to remove convicts and felons from exercising voting rights; allowing the dead to vote; not requiring proof of citizenship when soliciting voter registrations through the DOL.

Americans ASSUME the laws are being followed. It is disrespectful and disgraceful to allow non-citizens the same rights and privileges as U.S. Citizens. It is a Class C Felony to register when not qualified, and a Class C Felony every time an illegal voter, votes. Each offense means 5 yeas jail time, and $10,000 fine. There are laws to preserve those rights and privileges but they are rendered worthless thanks to the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Prosecuting Attorneys who will not prosecute, and the County Auditors who are charged to enforce the laws: not protect those who violate them.

The challenge of DOL registrants on the basis the may be non-citizens amounts to housekeeping the county auditors are required to do in their official capacity. The effort amounts to holding election officials responsible for their duties set out under the law. The effort demonstrates a US citizen’s willingness to do more then those who we have elected to ensure the integrity of our election system. I never thought I would be called “an IDIOT,” and a racist on the public airways, the printed media, and the Internet, for doing what I consider a privilege, to defend provisions of our Constitution, and the laws protecting all – including the non-citizens.

Having put forth the effort to become a citizen, there is nothing more offensive to me then to learn that others are given the same rights I have worked hard for and they have done nothing except to get a driver's license. Shameful. They are diminishing the right and privilege of all legal voters, and violate the “equal protection under the law” provisions guaranteed to all U.S. Citizens. Few understand how “naturalized” US Citizens feel about this, and no-one deserves to be called “AN IDIOT,” “a RACIST,” or call anyone names for exercising rights guaranteed by the US and Washington State Constitution.

There are also other problems inherent in people living and working here illegally in America. For example: they work and may be paying taxes and they do not file tax returns because they will be "found out" and may be deported. Simple solution. Become a citizen of the United States and be an honest contributor to this country. Anyone is allowed to hold dual citizenship. Not a problem. It's only a problem because they choose not to become legal citizens. One very offensive act involves individuals and businesses hiring non-citizens and paying them subservient wages, and no benefits. This is illegal and degrades human dignity and respect ALL human beings deserve, regardless of citizenship status. To illustrate, the former Chief of Police in New York City, who was nominated to replace Tom Ridge as the head of the Homeland Security Administration, lied about having employed an illegal non-citizen, which ended up embarrassing the US President and caused him to withdraw from consideration.

Our elected and appointed representatives should have been enforcing the laws all along; something every citizen assumes they are doing. To find out they haven't been doing it is shocking, to say the least. Time to clean up the system, to make it as good as it can be. To "find" uncounted absentee ballots so long after the election has been certified is reprehensible and points to lax election procedures and incompetent training. Those people voted according to the law and their votes are not counted. Their voice has been taken away. For non-citizens to be voting, for convicts to be voting, for the dead to be voting, for people to be voting who are not registered, dilutes the votes of legal voters.

America is a wonderful country. We have freedoms and rights and privileges that other nations do not extend to their people. We have those rights and privileges because we have rules that govern our actions and keep things working in a fair and honest fashion, supposedly. When people fail to do their jobs completely and accurately, when problems such as this past election have brought to light occur: the system is broke.

The only course of action to take at this point is to identify all of the problems and institute corrections. Election reform is long past due.

RINGHOFER is obviously not indigenous to the United States, and I would welcome anyone giving me a call to question if I am a U.S. Citizen. In fact, it would make me feel proud to answer that I am a U.S. Citizen, and given the ridiculous election we have just witnesses, and participated in, anyone actually doing something to try to keep it from never happening again would renew my confidence in our election system.

Thank goodness we live in a country where we have the right to elect people to power and are not held hostage by those to assume it, no matter what.
Thank goodness we live in a country where we have the power to enact new laws to fix old injustices.

Let's get all the illegal voters legal so they to can join in legal voters' efforts to make this nation the best it can be.

A nasty turn in election challenge

2005-04-06T01:17:00.000-07:00

The Seattle Times
Editorials / Opinions

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 a.m.
Editorial

A nasty turn in election challenge

CHALLENGES of the state election system crossed the line from reasonable to unreasonable when a citizen tried to force more than a thousand people with foreign-sounding names to prove their right to vote.

Martin Ringhofer of Soap Lake has challenged voting credentials of 1,668 people in 12 counties based on the sound of their name. "The challenge of voters who may not be citizens is based on listing individuals whose first, middle and last name have no basis in the English language," he said. The effect is hideous racial and ethnic profiling and needless disruption of the lives of ordinary, law-abiding citizens.

The law allows a citizen to question credentials of another voter, but the challenger also must provide personal knowledge that the other person should not be allowed to vote. It should not be a wild guess — a fair description of Ringhofer's evidence so far.

Ringhofer has cast a ridiculously wide net in a fishing expedition that leaves county auditors and voters to reconcile later.

Ringhofer asked election officials to review voting credentials of voters in King, Spokane, Grant, Adams, Yakima and other counties, because their names "appear to be from outside the United States." Ringhofer targets voters with names that are Hispanic and Asian but also Russian and Ukranian.

Ringhofer, who voted for Dino Rossi for governor, appears to be acting alone. State Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance condemned, and distanced himself from, this misguided campaign.

State election officials are not aware of a single documented instance where a non-citizen voted in the governor's race. That is not to say non-citizens did not vote or that non-citizens should vote. They should not.

Ringhofer believes many on his lists are illegal immigrants who registered to vote when they obtained or renewed a driver's license.

Ringhofer has attracted attention of the Department of Justice because he may be in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act, which prohibits use of different standards for voters based on perception of race.

This is a nasty turn in the election challenge. Ringhofer is engaged in a despicable witch hunt.

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company

Man says votes from illegal immigrants

2005-03-31T07:16:00.000-08:00

He culled list of voters for names that 'appear' foreign

Jim CamdenStaff writer
March 31, 2005

A Soap Lake man is challenging the voting credentials of hundreds of Washington voters, saying he thinks they're illegal immigrants who registered and cast ballots illegally.

But Martin Ringhofer may have a hard time proving the challenges he has filed in Spokane and 10 other Washington counties.

For one thing, there's the methodology of his research. Ringhofer said he obtained a list of people who registered to vote when they obtained or renewed a driver's license, then culled the list for names "that appear to be from outside the United States," particularly those that appeared to be Hispanic or Asian.

"We eliminated names that clearly sounded American-born, like John Smith, or Powell," he said Wednesday.

For another, there's the fact that many of the people on his list are citizens. In fact, The Spokesman-Review contacted a dozen of the 161 people on Ringhofer's Spokane County list, and all of them are citizens.

"It's kind of insulting that someone would decide because our name is different than Smith or Jones that we're not American," said Deborah Kay Carollo, of Spokane Valley, who is on the list with her husband, Anthony Carollo. "I was born at Sacred Heart. My husband's great-grandfather came over from Italy."

"I was born in Ithaca, N.Y., and have lived in the United States all my life," said Jon Garcia, another Valley resident on the list.

"That's crazy," said Felix Castro, of Spokane, who is on the list with his wife, Adela. Both were born in the United States.

Kimberly Espinosa, of Medical Lake, another American-born citizen, was surprised when told she was on a list of illegal immigrants who voted: "I'm going to kick somebody's butt."

Yousef Beyrouti, who was naturalized as an American citizen more than a year ago and then signed up to vote, said he wasn't angry to be on a list that questioned his eligibility to vote. But he suggested that Ringhofer should do a better job of research.

"In the United States, immigrants come from all over the world," Beyrouti said. "He should know better, that names don't mean a lot and you can't make judgments based on names."

Ringhofer, who filed the challenges on behalf of a group he calls Washington State Americans for Legal Immigration, acknowledged that his system for finding illegal aliens who vote could have problems.

"I was well aware of the fact that there would be errors," he said.

But he doesn't see that as a problem because people on the list who are citizens can simply tell county officials that they are citizens and provide some proof. It's not his responsibility to correct those mistakes, he insisted, but the job of county elections officials.

Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton disagrees. State statute says the person filing a challenge must prove "by clear and convincing evidence that the challenged voter's registration is improper," Dalton said.

"Otherwise, a flood of unsupported allegations could have a chilling effect upon the ability of segments of the population to register and vote," she said.

Ringhofer's challenges in Spokane and the other counties don't meet the strict requirements of the law, Dalton said.

He filed a single document that says he believes people registered to vote without proof of citizenship and attached a list with 161 names; Dalton and other auditors have concluded he needs to file a separate challenge for each name, with any proof that he has for that voter.

Told of Dalton's assessment of his challenge, Ringhofer said he hadn't been contacted by any elections officials but believes that his challenges are adequate. Although he's not an attorney, he believes he's correctly interpreting the law.

"I'm entitled, as a registered voter, as a U.S. citizen, to make that challenge," he said. He has an even bigger list he plans to file with King County.

The voters' challenges are Ringhofer's second challenge involving the state's elections process this year. In January, he tried to mount a recall of Secretary of State Sam Reed, who Ringhofer contended was guilty of malfeasance and misfeasance for allowing Democrat Christine Gregoire to be elected governor on the hand recount.

A Thurston County Superior Court said last month the charges listed in the recall petition were legally or factually insufficient, or both.

Ringhofer said some of the people involved in the Reed recall effort were supporting his challenge of illegal voters. Himself a legal immigrant, Ringhofer said "it's common knowledge" the nation has a problem with illegal aliens voting.

Ira Mehlman, of the Los Angeles-based Federation for American Immigration Reform, agreed that it is relatively easy for illegal immigrants to register to vote because proof of citizenship usually is not required.

"It happens," Mehlman said. "I don't know that anybody can quantify the problem."

But he questioned Ringhofer's method for picking suspected illegal alien voters. "You can't judge who's a citizen by the sound of a name. You can't draw a profile of what an American looks like."
Curtis Gans, director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate in Washington, D.C., called the registration of illegal aliens "a minor problem."

But trying to challenge such voters based on their names seems like "using a very blunt instrument" to address that problem, he added.

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/local/cover.asp

Tossof vs. Havealot

2005-03-20T10:07:00.000-08:00

Take a small town in Eastern Washington.

1,000 residents. 800 US citizens; 100 immigrants with green card; 100 illegal aliens w/o green card.

Of the 800 residents, who are US citizens, 400 register to vote; the other 400 don't register to vote for reasons of their own.

Of the 100 immigrants with a green card, 50 register to vote and sign the oath that they are a citizens. Likewise, 50 of the illegal aliens register to vote because they are not required to provide proof of citizenship.

In this example, 500 people are registered to vote. An election is held and 300 turn out to vote. The 300 are made up of the following:

[1] 150 are US citizens registered to vote
[2] 50 are provisional voters who never registered to vote; nobody knows who they are
[3] 25 are dead people who were registered at the time they died
[4] 25 are felons or convicts who where registered before they became a felon or a convict; they served their time and never had their privilege to vote reinstated
[5] 25 are immigrants with a green card, who registered to vote
[6] 25 are illegal aliens who registered to vote

Candidates in this scenario require 151 votes to prevail and win the election.

Candidates who receive 149 votes lose.

In this example, there are two candidates for Mayor: There is Dee Dee Tossof and Tina Havealot.

Tina Havealot gets 155 votes.

Dee Dee Tossof gets 145 votes.

Question #1: Who wins the election?
Question #2: How many people should have been "entitled" to vote? Why?
Question #3: Should each vote cast be worth 1/300th?
Question #4: Was anyone's vote stolen? If yes or no, why?
Question #5: Should every vote count? If yes or no, why?
Question #6: Who should win this election and why?
Question #7: What should happen with the outcome of the election, and why.

Between 50,230 and 87,000 illegal aliens Registered to vote

2005-03-15T21:26:00.000-08:00

Based on "preliminary data" from the Grant County elections Department, 30-40% of illegal aliens are registered and voting; with another 30-40% registered and AFRAID to vote, nevertheless registered.

Registering alone is a serious fine and jail time; registering and voting is added jail time and fine. The illegalk aliens are most likely to play "ignorant" and merely say they were asked if the wanted to register, so they did. They will claim their English is not good enough for them to understand.

If they got a driver's license, their English has to be good enough to know what it means to BE or NOT to BE a US Citizens.

Randomly picking 62 names from the DOL List who reside in Grant County, WA, with either a Hispanic, Russian, or Foreign sounding last name, the Grant County Elections Department was asked to identify the following, and see their response:

1. Are they registered voters in Grant County;

elections@co.grant.wa.us: SEE LIST

2. Do you have a completed registration signed by the individual attesting they are a U.S. Citizen;

elections@co.grant.wa.us: YES

3. Does Grant County ask the individual if they are a US Citizens and/or does the county require proof of US Citizenship when the individual registers to vote;

elections@co.grant.wa.us: NOT AT THAT TIME- WE TELL THEM TO READ THE OATH ATTESTING TO THAT FACT

4. Did these individuals vote in the 2004 Primary and the 2004 General Elections.

elections@co.grant.wa.us: SEE LIST

From 62: 51 were registered to vote. Though 51 were registered to vote, only 23 of the 62 had voted, some going back 11 years. 28 of 62 were registered but had NEVER voted or were inactive voters.

The 23 who were are registered and had voted represent a 37% of the random sample of 62.

We will have to determine how many of these people who registered are U.S.
Citizens, and who are illegal Aliens. After we determine that, we'll have to get this information for the other 38 other counties and see how those numbers play. Whichever way you cut it, there is no way we can ever be assured of honest elections, devoid of illegal aliens voting, without a 100% re-registration of all voters in this state.

This is "preliminary data" and we are working on getting the rest for Grant County, and plan to prioritize getting this data for the other 38 counties, specially Eastern WA where a high concentration of illegal aliens are known to reside.

If the 37% holds true for all 39 WA counties, based on INS figures of 136,000 to 235,000 illegal aliens in our state, we had between 50,230 and 87,000 illegal aliens Registered to vote and voting in our September 2004 Primary and November 2004 General Election.

SAM REED IS NOT THE ISSUE

2005-03-09T01:42:00.000-08:00

Recall Reed appeal was filed in the Supreme Court Tuesday morning 03/08/05.

The Recall Reed Team is discussing the bigger picture of this RECALL REED effort of whether "the people" who reserve certain rights for themselves, and do not delegate to their elected representatives, have the constitutional right "to expect" their elected officials and representatives, at ALL levels, TO UPHOLD and enforce the Constitution.

What in the constitution or the RCW's gives these elected officials and Judges the right to TAKE AWAY the right of the people to collect signatures, as a precursor to making the case to the recall an elected official for wrong doing, not allowed or expected to perform, in their official capacity?

CLEARLY: the King County Prosecutor filing charges against 99 King County Felons who voted is STEP ONE toward undoing this fraudulent election which SAM REED ought NEVER have certified.

Again: SAM REED is becoming less relevant to this RECALL effort, as the big picture really is:

(1) Do the people have the right to expect their elected officials to uphold our State Constitution, and

(2) Can "the people" fire officials who VIOLATE the constitutional requirements.

Didn't we go through this with our Declaration for Independence in 1776? It is OBSCENE that we have elected officials who waive sign language and use taxes to defend their ILLEGAL ACTIONS against the interests of the people.

It is very telling that Paul Berendt, the State Democratic Chair, DEFENDS the REPUBLICAN Sam Reed -- NOT Chris Vance, the GOP State Chair. THINK about it.

As to meeting both LEGAL and FACTUAL insufficiency on our Recall Charges: we laid out the charges as NINE SEPARATE charges for a reason. We did so, to compartmentalize them into chunks, which make up a whole -- that of a SET of charges, all of them combined making up a battery of charges. Think of it as a "battery" of tests when they analyze your health by drawing blood. One test by itself may look good; but when you add them all up, you get a composite picture.

It is indisputable in Judge Wickham's OWN WORDS, that:

On some of the nine charges, we met legal sufficiency.

On some, we met FACTUAL sufficiency.

When looked at by the "unobservant" and the "mainstream media," our case was dismissed on 02/14/05.

When looked at by NINE Supreme Judges, at least 5 Judges will not be fooled and will see what really happened: we met LEGAL AND FACTUAL sufficiency if you look at all nine charges as a battery of charges, all of which are part of one set of charges which we could have submitted as ONE CHARGE.

In case you have not heard of it, Paul Berendt, the Democratic State Chair has publicly accused me and Linda to be stooges for Carl Rove, and that we were put up to RECALL REED by Carl Rove and the National GOP. Utterly ridiculous. Anyone who knows me and Linda Jordan knows we have been and remain totally NONPARTISAN, have no connection with Carl Rove, the GOP anywhere, and have no idea where Paul Berendt got such NONSENSE. Categorically totally fabricated and a blatant lie and Paul Berendt knows it! It is disgraceful that anyone would make such a charge when they know it is a ridiculous and preposterous lie. Why do I say this? Simple. I know it is FALSE, and as such, I know Paul Berendt cannot dig up any evidence to support such a ridiculous charge.

Twenty-four hours ago, Harry Stonecipher, the Boeing CEO, was FIRED for having an improper relationship with a company executive. None of this has to do with Harry's "official" duties as CEO and was not done at the expense of doing his job. Though morally wrong, and violation of company ethics, that's what it was.

By comparison, SAM REED violated his oath of office, violated countless State Laws, violated the State Constitution, with implications far greater then Harry Stonecipher having a relationship with another company executive, and SAM REED is DEFENDED by the Attorney General, at a tab of $250,000 legal fund paid by us -- the taxpayers -- and defended by a Judge who readily admits that SAM REED Legally and Factually violated provisions which entitle the people to merely collect 660,000 signatures, to ultimately decide whether ALL of the people choose to fire or retain him.

When you think about the above, I bring to your attention that it is an admitted fact by SAM REED's Office, that when Initiative, and Referendum Signatures are checked --
TWENTY PERCENT are ILLEGAL. Apply the same standard to the nearly four million voters in this last election, and by SAM REED'S Own statistics, 800,000 were ILLEGAL and SAM REED has done "nothing" to correct the problem.

In fact, Sam Reed has done EVERYTHING possible to make sure that all the possible and potential illegal voters do indeed VOTE.

“RECALL REED” TEAM FILES MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

2005-02-25T07:44:00.000-08:00

The “Recall Reed” team has filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the opinion handed down by Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham in the recall of Secretary of State Sam Reed.

All nine charges were rejected by Judge Wickham on February 14 for failing to meet either one or both of the legal and factual sufficiency requirements of the state’s recall statute.The Motion for Reconsideration is an optional step in the recall statute. Instead of immediately appealing the decision to the Supreme Court, the petitioners have requested Judge Wickham to review his February 14 decision based on “manifest error”.

We argue that he showed a complete disregard for controlling law and credible evidence in the record when he failed to find that the recall charges were legally and factually sufficient.

In addition, the “Recall Reed” team has also presented additional case law and new facts that, despite the diligence of the team, did not come to its attention until after Judge Wickham’s February 14, 2005 ruling.

A favorable ruling, based on the motion, would allow the recall petition to move forward with a signature-gathering drive to collect 600,000 valid signatures to remove Secretary of State Sam Reed from office.

The recall was filed against Secretary of State Reed by Martin Ringhofer and Linda Jordan, who have charged the Secretary of State with malfeasance and misfeasance in office, and violating his oath of office in the conduct of the 2004 election.

Cited in one of the charges, for example, as Washington’s chief election officer, Secretary of State Reed’s foremost duty during the election was to certify the county auditor’s certification of vote tally from each of the 39 counties. By law, he does not have the option of accepting incomplete certifications. Yet, he did, which precipitated the “raging” controversy of the 2004 election.

Contact: Linda Jordan
The Recall of Sam Reed
Email: recall@comcast.net

REED RECALL WILL GO FORWARD

2005-02-17T07:26:00.000-08:00

PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release

Contact: Linda Jordan
The Recall of Sam Reed
Phone: (206) 723-6471

Email: recall@comcast.net

Media reports that an effort to recall Secretary of State Sam Reed cannot move forward is misleading.

Judge Chris Wickham ruled that he did not think the recall should go forward but that decision can and will be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Wickham's role was to determine whether the charges were "legally and factually sufficient" enough to move forward to a signature gathering stage. Reed failed to uphold election law in several ways. One example: Secretary Reed is not allowed to accept incomplete certifications of vote tallies from counties. He did. Could you imagine being able to tell the bank that you have $3,000 in your account when your deposit records show you only have $1,200? And then demanding that they count that phantom $1,800 as if it were real? Do you think the Bank President is just going to give you that phantom $1,800 dollars even though you cannot explain how, where or when you deposited it?

King County forwarded to the Secretary of State 1,800 more votes than they had voters. They did not and still cannot reconcile that difference. By law the Secretary should have rejected that vote tally until all votes they submitted could be tied to a voter. Talk about stuffing the ballot box.
Here is part of what Judge Chris Wickham ruled:

Recall Charges: 1 through 6: Reed ignored numerous voting irregularities and discrepancies, particularly in King County.

Wickham ruled: that petitioners failed to make any specific allegations as to facts, failed to show wrongful conduct on the part of the Secretary of State, and found charges 1 through 6 to be factually insufficient. (He did not find they were legally insufficient)

Petitioners disagree with the courts opinion. Petitioners provided sufficient supporting evidence that Secretary Sam Reed failed to enforce uniform election laws, failed to enforce his own emergency rules, and by ignoring these he indeed acted in a manner which clearly exceeds discretion and actually knowingly violated election laws.

Note: Judge Wickham did not find charges 1 through 6 to be legally insufficient. (He did not find them factually insufficient)

Recall Charge 7: Reed "accepted, as complete, the abstract of votes from 24 counties even though they did not provide all the material required by statute and regulations," Wickham ruled: there is no evidence that these irregularities are substantial enough to have made a difference in actions taken by the Secretary, accordingly the court found charge 7 both factually and legally insufficient.

Petitioners disagree with the courts opinion. Petitioners provided ample sufficient supporting evidence that Secretary Sam Reed was required not to certify the election results and does not have the discretion to accept, as complete, the abstract of votes from counties which came to Secretary Reed without all the material required by statute and regulations. Reed does not have the discretion to accept incomplete results from the counties as complete. We believe Charge 7 is factually and legally sufficient

Recall Charge 8: Reed failed to enforce standards for the proper and uniform running of elections in the various counties. The essence of the allegation is that the Secretary failed to effectively oversee the voting procedures of the 39 counties.

Wickham ruled: the allegations are legally insufficient. (He did not find that it was factually insufficient)

Recall Charge 9: Reed wrongfully certified the final count in the November 2, 2004 Governor's race despite his knowledge of various irregularities and violations. Wickham ruled: that Charge 9 is legally insufficient. (He did not find that it was factually insufficient.)

Petitioners believe we provided ample evidence of numerous and substantial violations in the election process in various counties and that;

[1] Secretary Reed had substantial knowledge of those violations.
[2] Secretary Reed’s duty to certify the results from the various counties is not ministerial and is not discretionary.

Petitioners believe we provided sufficient evidence and factual data. Enough to make our case to the voters, to be able to convince them that Sam Reed neglected to perform his duties imposed by law and failed to uphold election law. Petitioners did show sufficiently that Reed unreasonably carried out his duties (or failed to carry them out) in such a way as to constitute misfeasance, malfeasance, and / or the violation of his oath of office.In the 2004 Online Voters' Guide, Secretary of State pledged: “My office is replacing hanging chads and punch cards with safe and secure voting equipment. Together, we've registered nearly 300,000 new voters. Following the Florida debacle in 2000 and new federal mandates, experience is more critical than ever for the Secretary of State". Sam Reed said, “My 20-plus years of knowledge and expertise will ensure that every vote is counted correctly.”

“Correctly” is the operative word here. Counting illegal votes, allowing new votes and "lost" ballots to be added in during the second and third count, is illegal. It is INCORRECT. The chief election officer of our state, Secretary Reed, has a responsibility to uphold election laws. It's that simple.

Currently, Reed is on the trail conducting public meetings about how he's going to clean things up in the future, how’s he's going to make new election laws for the future elections. "Look at what I'm going to do in the future but forget about what I just did during the last three and a half months."

Folks, we have laws on the books right now governing our election process, Mr. Reed just didn't follow them.

http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com/

Secretary of State Skates on Election Law Violations: Ballots that once were lost but then were found isn't a religious experience

2005-02-14T22:53:00.000-08:00

“While a “raging controversy” may have brought these numerous election law violations to light, it did not cause them. Quite the contrary, it was Secretary Sam Reed’s failure to enforce election laws and his failure to abide by those laws that caused a “raging controversy”. (The Recall of Sam Reed No.05-2-00222-8, Thurston County Superior Court)

“Ballots that once were lost but then were found isn’t a religious experience its a violation of election law. The Secretary of State knows that. The law is clear, when you do a “recount” you can only count votes that were already counted. It was his job to keep illegal votes and voters out.” Linda Jordan

In King County alone, after the November 2, 2004 election, "lost ballots" were found 9 times after the original votes were counted. Reed allowed them to be added into the recount and guess what? King County ended up with 1,800 more votes than voters and Christine Gregoire (D) ends up winning the governor ship over Dino Rossi (R) by 129 votes. Rossi won the first count and the first recount but the third hand recount was the charm for Democrats who found votes under tables, behind machines, three's probably even a few down Sandy Berger's pants they left out.

Secretary Reeds refusal to follow the law “affected, interrupted and interfered” with the performance of his official duty as the chief election official of Washington state. He should have never certified the November 2, 2004 election. When he certified that election debacle he wasn't following the law he was violating it.

“We made an excellent case. The Judge ruled that many of our charges were factually and legally sufficient but then he goes ahead and says that we cant let the people see the facts and judge for themselves. That doesn't make any sense. We’re going all the way with this one. This isn't about Republicans or Democrats, it's about fair elections.” Martin Ringhofer

Press Contact: recallreedblog.blogspot.com
Also: See http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/

Rossi the Front Leader at 55%

2005-02-11T22:49:00.000-08:00

In a new election for the Washington State's Governor, vote for one of the following candidates:

Mary Lane (R) 0 %
Slade Gorton (R) 0 %
Bill Finkbeiner (R) 0 %
Chris Vance (R) (1) %
Dino Rossi (R) (24) 55 %
Ron Sims (D) 0 %
Chris tine Gregoire (D) (3) 6 %
Phil Talmadge (D) (2) 4 %
Maria Cantwell (D) 0 %
None of the Above (13) 30 %
Vote in this poll
Total Votes: 43

Reed Recall Petition to Thurston Superior Court by the Attorney General

2005-02-10T01:59:00.000-08:00

Here is the much awaited petition hundreds of you have requested. We go forward into court on Monday and are confident the court will grant the Recall to go forward.

We have sought price and scheduling information from major and community news tabloids to print and insert the petition in their publication. If any of you would like a camera ready copy, write us and it will be emailed to you upon request.

PETITION TO RECALL WASHINGTON STATE SECRETARY OF STATE SAM REED

WARNING

In accordance with RCW 29A.72.140; know the following:

Petition for the recall of the Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed to the Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed:

We, the undersigned citizens and legal voters of the state of Washington, respectfully direct that a special election be called to determine whether or not Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed be recalled and discharged from his office, for and on account of having committed the act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or having violated his or her oath in the following particulars:

BALLOT SYNOPSIS FOR RECALL OF SAM REED AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

The statement of charges alleges that Sam Reed, as Washington Secretary of State, failed to comply with statutory duties of his office in certifying the November 2, 2004, Washington State General Election, as follows:

Was aware of the following deficiencies in King County election returns prior to certification:

1. Counted approximately 1,800 more votes than people who voted;
2. Included additional ballots discovered 9 different times;
3. Allowed at least 348 provisional ballots to be fed into counting machines without first being canvassed for legality;
4. Included votes of at least 557 people who may not have been properly registered to vote;
5. Was aware prior to certification that more than 55,000 ballots were enhanced by election workers in a manner preventing review of those decisions.
6. Accepted from 24 counties abstracts of votes not providing all material required by statute and regulation.
7. Failed to perform rule making duties detailed in RCW 29A.O4.610.
8. Certified the November 2, 2004 election knowing that election laws and regulations had been violated.

SHOULD SAM REED BE RECALLED FROM OFFICE BASED ON THESE CHARGES?

and each of us for himself or herself says: I have personally signed this petition; I am a legal voter of the State of Washington in the precinct and city (or town) and county written after my name, and my residence address is correctly stated, and to my knowledge, have signed this petition only once.

No. Name Residence Address City State Zip Code County E-mail Address

Return to: Recall Sam Reed, P.O. Box 216, Soap Lake, WA 98851, http://www.recallreed.blogspot.com/, recall@comcast.net, Linda Jordan, 206) 723-6471.

THURSTON SUPERIOR COURT MOVES THE REED RECALL FORWARD

2005-02-09T09:31:00.000-08:00

An effort to recall Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed was moved forward last Monday.

The Reed Recall declared confidence after getting a week-long extension by Judge Chris Wickham to respond to Secretary of State Sam Reed’s defense.

“We want to ensure due process. Unlike ‘Christine Gregoire’s Media Machine’ and Secretary of State Sam Reed’s, we don’t spin. We don’t have a $200,000 taxpayer paid team of lawyers preparing our case. Ours is a grassroots people effort.”

“Secretary Sam Reed failed to enforce his own WACs 434-253-203 and 434-253-204 which require full reconciliation or an explanation why that is impossible before certification, or the more unchallenged provisional ballots fed into voting machines than the spread between the top two gubernatorial candidates,” said the Reed Recall Team.

In regard to Chelan County Superior Court Judge John Bridges’ decision to narrow down the defendants to the executive officers whom certified the election: “It’s obvious that Secretary Sam Reed’s core argument that he was just a rubber stamp is bogus. Already The Chronicle Editorial Board affirmed in today’s editorial page :

“REED TARGET: Secretary of State Sam Reed was left by Judge Bridges as the principal remaining defendant in the case, along with two other individuals.
Reed, himself a Republican, rightfully raised the ire of many in his party when he certified Gregoire as the victor after the second, hand, recount on Dec. 23.
He did that even though the Rossi campaign said there were hundreds of examples of illegal votes by felons and dead people and of provisional ballots in King County that were counted without first checking their validity.”

“We just got our first endorsement. We feel confident the court will grant the Reed Recall to MOVE forward and let the people decide Sam Reed’s ultimate fate.”

[1] It’s on the WWW at http://www.chronline.com/Main.asp?SectionID=16&SubSectionID=101&ArticleID=18704
“New election for governor should still be required”

“None of the above” leads with Dino Rossi one vote behind

2005-02-08T07:18:00.000-08:00

In a new election for the Washington State's Governor, vote for one of the following candidates:

Mary Lane (R) 0 %

Slade Gorton (R) 0 %

Bill Finkbeiner (R) 0 %

Chris Vance (R) (1) 3 %

Dino Rossi (R) (11) 39 %

Ron Sims (D) 0 %

Chris tine Gregoire (D) (2) 7 %

Phil Talmadge (D) (2) 7 %

Maria Cantwell (D) 0 %

None of the Above (12) 42 %

Vote in this poll

Total Votes: 28

New Election for Governor Poll

2005-02-06T13:55:00.000-08:00

Note: Below you will see the poll but to vote, please go to:

http://www.free-web-polls.com/cgi-bin/poll.pl?pollid=17804&subp=0.

With only 2 hours up, and few knowing about this on-line poll, the limited results thus far are as follows:

Mary Lane (R) 0 %
Slade Gorton (R) 0 %
Bill Finkbeiner (R) 0 %
Chris Vance (R) 0 %
Dino Rossi (R) (1) 11 %
Ron Sims (D) 0 %
Chris tine Gregoire (D) 0 %
Phil Talmadge (D) (2) 22 %
Maria Cantwell (D) 0 %
None of the Above (6) 66 %

You voted in this poll. Total Votes: 9

In a new election for the Washington State's Governor, vote for one of the following candidates:

In a new election for the Washington State's Governor, vote for one of the following candidates:

In a new election for the Washington State's Governor, vote for one of the following candidates:

Mary Lane (R)
Slade Gorton (R)
Bill Finkbeiner (R)
Chris Vance (R)
Dino Rossi (R)
Ron Sims (D)
Chris tine Gregoire (D)
Phil Talmadge (D)
Maria Cantwell (D)
None of the Above

Secretary of State Sam Reed in cross-hairs of controversy

2005-02-06T13:32:00.000-08:00

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA%20Ammons%20on%20Politics

Saturday, February 5, 2005 · Last updated 7:52 a.m. PT

By DAVID AMMONS AP POLITICAL WRITER

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- For a happy-go-lucky guy who hates conflict, Secretary of State Sam Reed finds himself the lightning rod for Washington's endless Election from Hell.

"With the megaphone of talk radio, web sites and blogs, critic Martin Ringhofer is launching the recall effort. Ringhofer, who works for Boeing and has homes in Seattle and Soap Lake, says Reed failed in myriad ways to conduct a legitimate election and should be ousted.

"It's not a personal thing," Ringhofer says. "I like him. I voted for him. But what happened here is inexcusable."

If the court allows the recall to proceed, Ringhofer will need well over 600,000 voter signatures to force a new vote on Reed's election.

Reed doesn't seem worried. "Obviously, people have a right to do this," he says. "I feel in many ways that our system worked well, considering that this was an absolutely unprecedented race that ended up with the closest margin in the history of the nation. But it also provided us lessons about where the warts and shortcoming are."

David Ammons is the AP's state political writer and has covered the statehouse since 1971. He may be reached at P.O. Box 607, Olympia, WA 98507, or at dammons@ap.org

Secretary of state recall hearing moves to Superior CourtJudge will hear Reed case Friday

2005-02-04T08:07:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, February 1, 2005
BRAD SHANNON
THE OLYMPIAN
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20050201/southsound/79482.shtml

A petition to recall Secretary of State Sam Reed moves to a Thurston County courtroom Friday to determine whether the allegations against Reed are sufficient to let a campaign begin against him.

Activist Martin Ringhofer, who lists residences in Seattle and Soap Lake, filed the petitions against Reed. He says the Republican official failed to uphold duties of his office when he certified Democrat Christine Gregoire as governor in December.

Gregoire's 129-vote victory also is the subject of losing Republican candidate Dino Rossi's court contest of the results. The latter case goes to court in Wenatchee on Friday.

The Reed hearing is one of several unrelated cases scheduled for 9 a.m. Friday before Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham. It is the first step in what promises to be a convoluted process under state law.

Reed's office has denied the allegations against him, saying he has followed the law. Reed also says he is getting support around the state for his actions.

At issue in court is the proposed ballot synopsis that the Attorney General's Office prepared for the recall and the adequacy of the allegations under recall law.

Ringhofer and supporters claim Reed committed misfeasance and malfeasance in office by certifying the election even though some felons illegally voted and elections officials were unable to identify as many named voters as they did ballots cast.

The complaint also accuses Reed of disenfranchising 300 military voters, allowing 55,000 King County ballots to be enhanced in ways that don't allow reviews and other missteps.

"The Superior Court shall consider only the sufficiency of the charges and not the truth of the charges," wrote assistant attorney general Brian Buchholz, who was assigned by Attorney General Rob McKenna to handle this portion of the case.

"The voters consider the truth of the charges if the recall proceeds to the ballot."

A separate Attorney General lawyer -- assistant attorney general Jeff Even --actually is defending Reed.

Even and Buchholz say a wall has been erected between the two legal efforts.

Even, who also is representing the secretary of state in the Rossi election challenge, said Monday that he hadn't seen the court filing by Buchholz.

Even also said he likely will ask the Thurston County court to delay the recall hearing because he needs to be in Chelan on the Rossi case on the same morning.

Because Ringhofer filed an amended version of his recall complaint, Buchholz is preparing a second ballot synopsis to file with the court. "At that point, it will be up to the court and the parties what to do with the two," Buchholz said.

Brad Shannon is political editor for The Olympian.

He can be reached at 360-753-1688 or beshanno@olympia.gannett.com.

SAM REED SWEARS “IT IS ABSURD” TO CONTEND THAT HE CAN BE RECALLED FROM OFFICE

2005-02-03T01:51:00.000-08:00

http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.petitiononline.com/reed2005/
http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/ (Allied Blog)

SEATTLE, WA – Secretary of State Sam Reed, through his taxpayer paid attorney, Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey T. Even (WSBA # 20367, phone # (360) 586-0728) filed his defense with Thurston County Superior Court on February 1, 2005. The hearing is set for Monday 02/07/05, 9AM.

In his defense filing Secretary of State Sam Reed makes the following statements:

“The charges filed in this action are clear examples of the type of charges that Washington courts have frequently found insufficient. The Court should dismiss the present action on the basis that the charges are factually and legally insufficient to meet the high burden that a proponent of recall must meet.”

“”… mere pique or disagreement with the Secretary of State’s statutorily-mandated functions is grossly inadequate as a basis for a recall.”

“The court need not inquire into the merits of the matter at all, because Mr. Ringhofer has utterly failed to comply with the statutory requirements on the very face of his statements of charges.” Indeed, the Attorney General would have been legally justified in refusing to prepare a petition and ballot synopsis in this matter at all.”

“Mr. Ringhofer’s charges fail on the standard of legal sufficiency as well as factual sufficiency. Even to put the best face on Mr. Ringhofer’s statement of charges, his allegation amounts to no more than an accusation that Secretary of State acted improperly in certifying the statewide election results for Governor, given what Mr. Ringhofer believes to have been errors made by other entities or individuals at the county levels.”

“The Secretary’s duty, however, is limited to certifying statewide election results based upon the results certified to him by the counties.”

“The duties of the Secretary of State are limited to compiling these returns on a statewide basis. The county canvassing boards are final decision makers as to the returns of each county.”

“The state constitution, as well, imposes on the Secretary a ministerial duty to certify the returns as submitted by the counties.”

“The constitution clearly prescribes that the counties make the final decisions as to the returns, and the Secretary of State is under a constitutionally-imposed duty to deliver those to the speaker of the house. Since the constitution and laws give the Secretary no choice in the matter, had he refused to do so, mandamus would have been in order to compel him to certify the results.”

“It is absurd to contend that the Secretary can be recalled from office for performing a duty he was legally compelled to perform.”

“There is no basis for asserting that the Secretary committed any act that could form the basis of a recall. This would be true even if it were conclusively established that errors at the county level took place. If the county makes an error in certifying totals at the county level, the proper remedy is an election contest action filed under RCW 29A.68, the remedy is neither the rejection of certifying results by the Secretary, nor a recall action against the Secretary.”

“The court need not and should not reach the question of the adequacy of the ballot synopsis because the charges are plainly insufficient, and the synopsis is thus irrelevant.”

“The court should determine that Mr. Ringhofer’s statement of charges is factually and legally insufficient and enter an order dismissing this matter.”

The courthouse, if you want to see the action, is located at 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW in Olympia, WA. Clerk Betty J. Gould, Telephone (360) 786-5549, email:

civlaw@co.thurston.wa.us.

Again, the hearing is at 9 AM, Monday in front of Judge Chris Wickham of Thurston County Superior Court.

Contact: Linda Jordan
The Recall of Sam Reed
Phone: (206) 723-6471
Email: recall@comcast.net

THURSTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT RECALL HEARING WITH JUDGE WICKHAM IS RESCHEDULED FROM FRIDAY 02/04/05 TO MONDAY 02/07/05 9AM

2005-02-02T09:04:00.000-08:00

In his 01/26/05 Memorandum to the Superior Court of Thurston County on the Recall, Attorney General Rob McKenna said:

” After the filing of this petition with the Court, the Attorney General has no further statutory duties in this matter and does not become an advocate for either side in the recall matter.”

Though the Attorney General’s Office has no further statutory duties in this matter and does not become an advocate for either side in the recall matter, Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey T. Even filed a NOTICE OF APPEARANCE with the court on 01/31/05, entering his appearance on behalf of SAM REED, Secretary of State, in this Recall action.

On 02/01/05, the Thurston County Superior Court, which had previously scheduled the hearing for Friday 02/04/05, based on the request from the Attorney General’s Office for Legislative Priority, informed the Sam Recall Reed Group the hearing was rescheduled from Friday 02/04 to Monday 02/7/05.

The new hearing will be held in Thurston County Superior Court on Monday February 7, 2005, at 9AM, before Judge Chris Wickham. Thurston County Superior Court is located at 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW in Olympa, WA./, Clerk Betty J. Gould, Telephone (360) 786-5549, email: civlaw@co.thurston.wa.us.

In the 2004 Online Voters' Guide, Secretary of State pledged: “My office is replacing hanging chads and punch cards with safe and secure voting equipment. Together, we’ve registered nearly 300,000 new voters. Following the Florida debacle in 2000 and new federal mandates, experience is more critical than ever for the Secretary of State. Sam Reed said “My 20-plus years of knowledge and expertise will ensure that every vote is counted correctly.”

The Recall Sam Reed Group filed a a 61-page “Supporting Affidavit and Declaration’ with The Superior Court of Washington for Grant County on Tuesday 02/01/04 in the Clerk’s Office, at 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Building 2, Olympia, WA.

“Sam Reed’s acts and actions cited in this petition cannot reasonably be viewed as anything except the willful neglect or failure by Sam Reed to faithfully perform his duties imposed by law,” said Linda Jordan, spokeswoman for the Recall Sam Reed effort.

The petition can be viewed at:

http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com.

The group has also posted a Recall Sam Reed Petition on the Internet at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/reed2005/. Only registered, legal, and “alive” voters are allowed to register their support at the site.

Contact: Linda Jordan The Recall of Sam Reed
Phone: (206) 723-6471
Email: recall@comcast.net

Legal Files RE SecState Reed Recall

2005-01-30T22:02:00.000-08:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005/01/legal-files-re-secstate-reed-recall-01.html

Okay, hopefully again my trusty "overlord of the Pacific Northwest eNews" Orbusmax will cover this...

ALL files in Adobe PDF:

HERE is the Reed Recall's acknowledgement of service of "the PETITION TO DETERMINE SUFFICIENCY OF RECALL CHARGES AND FOR APPROVAL OF BALLOT SYNOPSIS, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW, and the AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE"

HERE is Notary Public and WA St. AGO Legal Aide Patti Hurn's declaration that she sent the "the Petition to Determine Sufficiency of Recall Charges and for Approval of Ballot Synopsis, Attorney General's Memorandum of Law and Acknowledgement of Service" to both the Reed Recall and Secretary of State (SecState) Sam Reed.

HERE is probably, almost certainly the most important document: The Attorney General of Washington's memorandum as to the law governing the recall of SecState Sam Reed.

HERE is the 1-page reminder from the State AG's office to the Clerk for Thurston County Superior Court as to scheduling the hearing (on Friday, folks).

HERE is the 1-page cover letter to Martin Ringhofer, the gentleman (and may I say patriot) filing the recall, as to the recall documents.

Open election better than alternative

2005-01-30T14:38:00.000-08:00

Sunday, January 30, 2005
by MARK TRAHANT
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/209802_trahant30.html

Every day I read new evidence about Washington's corrupt election process. There's evidence of dead voters, felons who voted, fictional registrations, people who voted twice and registered at phony addresses.

Democracy itself is at stake because "they" stole our election. So there's a pitch for a new election (one that promises somehow, magically, to not be so tainted). Every new allegation is a reminder that no one can defend the election system we have; to do so is to support fraud. This is a narrative with only one side, a clear example of an election gone awry.

But beware of one-sided stories. They are flat -- and often wrong -- and the story is richer when you consider the entire sphere. This one-sided narrative ought to be part of a much larger discussion, part of a long-running debate about who should vote.

Two centuries ago, the founders of the United States feared direct democracy and with universal suffrage, the prospect of a "fraudulent" outcome.

One of the authors of the Constitution -- Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania -- thought voting should be limited to men of property because if the nation gives "the votes to people who have no property, and they will sell them to the rich, who will be able to buy them."

Even after the Constitution formed a more perfect union, lots of U.S. citizens were denied the right to vote because they were Catholic, female, American Indian, African American, Chinese, couldn't pay a poll tax or pass a literacy test.

Slowly, evolving over two centuries, this country dropped the anti-democratic restrictions. Less than a century ago, in 1910, women won the right to vote in Washington. American Indians won that same right in 1924. It was as late as 1964 that universal suffrage for African Americans supposedly was guaranteed for all with the Voting Rights Act (including a prohibition against the poll tax).

We, the people of Washington state, decided to go further than other states. Through our political process, we reached the philosophical conclusion that it's better to have more people voting, rather than fewer. This is the very premise that's at stake in this demand for a new election. The notion of an open election is not perfect because it means some people will cheat -- it's not ideal because a tiny slice of the population will register and vote illegally. But at least under an open process, every citizen has the opportunity to cast a vote.

Now, consider the alternative course, an election system that is more closed than open. Yes, we could purge the voting rolls. We could demand identification and papers from every citizen who pursues the right to vote. We could make fraud the highest priority, rather than access.

But that premise has consequences, too. In other states where preventing voter fraud is the highest priority, legitimate citizens are denied their right to vote.

Four years ago, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission investigated complaints from those disenfranchised in Florida. The conclusion was a mirror image of Washington's problems today.

"Non-felons were removed from voter registration rolls based upon unreliable information collected in connection with sweeping, state sponsored felony purge policies," the commission found.

Or many African Americans didn't vote because they were assigned polling places without resources to confirm voting eligibility.

The commission said: "Voter disenfranchisement appears to be at the heart of the issue. It is not a question of a recount or even an accurate count, but more pointedly the issue is those whose exclusion from the right to vote amounted to a 'No Count.' "

The disenfranchisement was too much even for the Republican Congress. It quickly passed the Help America Vote Act -- a philosophical stand that an open voting system is better than a closed one.

This is the undercurrent of the drive for a new Washington election. The complaints about voter fraud cite concerns about "legitimate" voters, but what's unsaid is the desire to return an election system that's more closed than open. Fewer, not more.

When Congress enacted the Help America Vote Act, it didn't go as far as the Civil Rights Commission recommended. That body said it's time to get rid of the laws preventing felons from voting because it's difficult to enforce (and expensive). The report said, "The Commission believes that to integrate ex-felons fully into society, they should have their voting rights restored."

The Civil Rights Commission said nearly 4 million Americans have lost their vote because of a felony conviction. And of those, "1.4 million are African American men; 13 percent of the black adult male population are disenfranchised, a rate seven times the national average."

In Washington, the process of voting restoration for felons is not impossible, it's largely process. So why go through it at all? Why not just restore the right to vote when people have completed their debts to society? Save the paperwork -- and the complications.

Yes, there should be a law enforcement review of illegal voting from time to time -- and prosecutions in the most egregious cases.

But I don't think we should give up on open voting, even if that means some people will cheat. It's a better course than disenfranchisement. Our government is based on consent of the governed -- and that principle requires as much participation as possible.

Mark Trahant is editor of the editorial page. E-mail: marktrahant@seattlepi.com

UPDATE ON REED RECALL

2005-01-29T22:13:00.000-08:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/

a) I just got the below well-written e-mail from the ringleader of the Reed recall and am copying it for you all:The Recall Reed petition can be found on-line at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/reed2005/

NOTE: This petition allows you to join the effort. We have not yet received the court's approval to proceed, hence -- this petition allows you to register your support and is not likely to carry the weight of law as required by the applicable Revised Code of Washington. Nevertheless, we are doing our best to demonstrate the awe of the Internet as a powerful tool to bring people who feel the same way "together" and voice their discontent over such a flawed election which should never have been certified.

Stand up, be counted, and sign this petition on line at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/reed2005/.

You are allowed to post your comments. This whole election certification is headed for DECERTIFICATION, as it should.

Write Sam Reed an email at: sreed @secstate.wa .gov, and ask him to DECERTIFY, voiding the need to Recall Sam Reed.

Who has not made a mistake in their life?

No-one has any ill feelings toward Sam Reed, nor is this a partisan issue.

We cannot allow such a fraudulent election stand, as it sends lots of wrong messages to everyone, specially children.

It is incredible to witness an IRAQI election take place where only the REGISTERED, and ALIVE voters are allowed to vote -- with ID required, thank you very much!You are encouraged to write me, and FORWARD this email to EVERYONE on your list of e-mail friends, coworkers, neighbors, family members, associates and acquaintances.

Together WE STAND, divided WE FALL.

Best wishes, Martin

http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com/ [- The OFFICIAL SAM REED RECALL BLOG]

Martin's a great guy :-). I hope he runs for Secretary of State one day! And yeah, I too have zilch ill feelings towards Secretary of State Sam Reed.

b) On the very same day the Democrats' motion to dismiss is heard in Wenatchee, Judge Chris Wickham of the Superior Court of Washington for Thurston County will hear the "Petition for Recall". I have a copy of the PDF if anybody's interested!!

Sam Reed responds to Democrats' Motions

2005-01-28T07:52:00.000-08:00

http://www.soundpolitics.com/

Secretary of State Sam Reed filed three responses in the Chelan County court case this week supporting the Republican position, or, more precisely, arguing that the Democrats' motions to dismiss the election contest are a load of rubbish.

In this response to the Democrats' motion to dismiss for improper venue, Secretary Reed argues that Chelan County is as proper a venue as any.

In this response to the Democrat's motion to dismiss causes for election contest, Secretary Reed argues that double votes and felon votes should count as illegal votes for the purpose of contesting an election, despite the Democrats' hilarious attempt to argue otherwise.

In this response to the Democrats' motion to strike the requested relief of a revote:

Secretary Reed respectfully submits that if the Court eventually concludes that the election results should be set aside, under the law, the voters, and not this Court or the Legislature, would select Washington’s governor.

Surely the Democrats will keep on writing their editorials and letters to the editors praising Reed for his independence and lack of partisanship.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at 11:24 PM

The Latest Missive From Gregoire

2005-01-27T21:29:00.000-08:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/

[Editor's note: Below is the latest Grade AA Bulls--t (as in the Beef rating) from your Governor-PRETEND]

Dear Friend,

Thank you so much for all you have done to help get Chris Gregoire elected.

You were there with us every step of the way, during the campaign, during the recount, and now through endless ugly republican attacks.

Now you join us in celebrating a new governor who every day proves she is well worth the wait.

Barely moved into her new office, Chris Gregoire is working hard for the people of Washington State and winning recognition for early successes.

Spotlight on Washington

This weekend we were thrilled when Governor Gregoire was chosen to represent Democratic governors and deliver the Democratic Party’s response to President Bush’s weekly radio address to the nation. This national distinction is rarely given to new governors.

Governor Gregoire pushed President Bush to be more responsive to the needs of the states. "Like other governors, we face tough challenges here in Washington state -- challenges that often frequently require a partnership with the federal government. But too often, the states feel the federal partnership is more promise than reality," she said.

Chris is showing she is ready to stand up to anyone to protect the interests of Washington State.

Read a full copy of her remarks by clicking here.

Taking Action on Healthcare

Governor Gregoire has wasted no time shaking things up in our Capitol and delivering on the commitments that she made through the course of the campaign.

Her first major set of reform proposals target our state's growing health care crisis.

Last week, with the stroke of a pen, Governor Gregoire stopped 19,000 kids from losing health insurance, moving our state toward her goal of universal health coverage for our kids.

The Seattle Times praised her saying "Gov. Chris Gregoire showed the right priorities in launching her term with a reversal of the rules that could’ve cost 19,000 children their state-sponsored health-care coverage." [Seattle Times, 1/24/05]

The measure was part of a five-point health care reform initiative that she announced last week. Chris also offered proposals to:

Reduce the cost of prescription drugs

Allow private employers to buy health insurance through the state Form a task force to find better ways to finance long-term healthcare services At the announcement Chris said "It is imperative that we address the health care and prescription-drug crisis facing our citizens. This is a national problem that begs for a national solution; we can’t truly solve this problem at the state level, but we can make a difference." [Seattle PI, 1/20/05]

Learn more by clicking here.

New Appointments, A New Beginning for Washington

The face of Olympia is changing. Chris is working hard to surround herself with a talented team ready to shake things up.

Yesterday, Governor Gregoire announced three important appointments. She appointed Harold Clarke, Chief of Nebraska’s prison system, to head the Washington Department of Corrections and asked for an independent review of the agency.

Chris also appointed Seattle attorney Richard Mitchell to the position of staff council. Kurt Fritts, Executive Director of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, was appointed to act as the Governor’s Director of External Affairs.

Read the Associated Press article on her announcements by clicking here.

If you are proud of your governor and all the good work she is doing, if you oppose republican attempts to stop progress in our state, write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper by clicking here.

Thank you again for all you have done to help Chris Gregoire become governor and move our state forward.

Sincerely,
Tracy Newman

The Scam of Voting by Noncitizens and Felons

2005-01-27T07:23:00.000-08:00

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2004/aug04/04-08-18.html

by Phyllis Schlafly, August 18, 2004

As the country appears so closely divided between the red and blue states, the Democrats are seeking odd-ball constituencies to enhance their numbers. They and their liberal-advocacy law firms and lobbyists have been working for months to get convicted felons credentialed to vote for John Kerry, and now they are going after the votes of noncitizens.

Many millions of noncitizens live in the United States, some legal and some illegal, and the Democrats see this as a win-win effort to get them to the polls on election day. They figure the percentages are pretty good that those constituencies will vote Democratic.

Local decisions to allow noncitizens to vote in city, county and school board elections should not give them a pass to vote in federal elections, but once they are on the precinct registration rolls, who is going to stop them? Certainly not the Democratic polling officials.

Five Washington, DC City Council members (fortunately, not a majority) just announced their support for a bill that would allow thousands of noncitizens to vote in local and school board elections. They are waving signs and slogans such as "Democracy for all" and "No taxation without representation."

The District may have as many as 40,000 resident noncitizens. That's clearly enough to provide the margin in a close election.

Americans don't have to stand by and tolerate this impertinence since, as in so many dilemmas, the U.S. Constitution provides the remedy. Article I, Section 8, gives Congress the power to pass "exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the District of Columbia, and the Republican Congress would be foolish if it doesn't act immediately to nip this mischief in the bud.

The DC City Council isn't the first to think up this thoroughly bad idea. San Franciscans will vote in November on whether to allow noncitizens, including even illegal aliens, to vote in school board elections even though this is probably a violation of the California state constitution which requires U.S. citizenship to be eligible to vote.

Other efforts to reward noncitizens with the franchise have emerged in New York City, Hartford, Los Angeles, Colorado, New Jersey, and Texas. Scattered municipalities in Massachusetts, Maryland, Illinois and New York have already gone down this road.

Giving voting rights to noncitizens is a thoroughly bad idea from every point of view. It cheapens citizenship and it could give legal cover to would-be terrorists who come to this country with hate in their hearts.

Enough problems are already caused by the Motor Voter Law, under which voting registration is offered to everyone getting a driver's license. This even includes those states that grant driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Becoming a resident of a state may confer the right to get a driver's license, but it does not and should not confer citizenship. According to U.S. law, lawful residents must also speak English and swear allegiance to the United States before they can become citizens.

And they must become citizens before they can vote. We don't want any immigrants voting who haven't made the conscious and sincere decision to renounce loyalty to the country they came from and pledge allegiance to the United States of America.

The Constitution should also be our starting point in the matter of allowing convicted felons to vote. The U.S. Constitution reserves the matter of voting regulations to state legislatures and, in the 14th Amendment, Section 2, specifically authorizes the disenfranchisement of felons.

Nevertheless, the Democrats have persuaded activist judges to force the state of Florida to assist felons, as they leave prison, in getting the right to vote. The Kerry campaign has already set up a nationwide legal network to recruit litigators and election lawyers to challenge the election results in Florida and other close states.

The Democrats have been whining about people who were mistakenly listed as felons on a state database during the 2000 Florida election. But the Democrats are silent about the convicted felons who actually did vote illegally in the 2000 Florida election, as well as the people who received absentee ballots to vote in both New York and Florida.

I suggest that those who are worried about whole groups of people not being able to vote, or not having their votes counted, should look into the matter of guaranteeing that U.S. military personnel serving overseas will have their ballots counted. In the uncertainties that followed the 2000 presidential vote count in Florida, an untold number of military ballots were never counted.

Today, about 150,000 of our service men and women are in Iraq or Afghanistan, and they above all deserve to have their right to vote assured and their ballots counted.

737 Illegal Votes

2005-01-26T22:37:00.000-08:00

http://soundpolitics.com/

Republicans have discovered and verified 737 illegal votes in Washington's ultra-close governor's election, state party leaders said Wednesday

Vance said Wednesday that Republicans determined the number of felons who voted illegally by comparing voting rolls from the secretary of state with a list of convicted felons from the State Patrol, and checking each name to determine whether the person's voting rights had been restored.

Vance said the 737 illegal votes broke down like this:

-186 felons in King County

-54 felons from elsewhere in the state

-44 people who died before absentee ballots were mailed

-10 who voted twice in Washington state

-6 who voted in Washington and another state

-437 provisional ballots that were illegally fed directly into voting machines, as reported by King, Pierce and Stevens counties.

And the number of illegal votes will only keep getting larger.Comment on Entry: 737 Illegal Votes, authored by Stefan Sharkansky

Although 737 seems like a lot, and more should be explored, that still pales in comparison to the thousands of "mystery ballots" which should also be a major point of argument.

Posted by supercat at January 26, 2005 09:23 PM

Direct quote from the Evergreen Freedom Foundation web site:

PRESS RELEASE January 25, 2005

Sec. of State refuses to change with the law

OLYMPIA—At today’s public hearing conducted by the office of the Secretary of State (SOS) on changes to Washington’s provisional ballot rules, Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) President Bob Williams testified that the lack of uniform standards in processing provisional ballots has seriously damaged the credibility of Washington’s elections process. According to Williams, this is a problem that is not addressed by the current Washington Administrative Code (WACs) changes currently under consideration.

“Validation rates have varied from 41% to 92% in the counties. Some counties did not verify signatures as required by state law,” said Williams, who oversees EFF’s Voter Integrity Project and its citizen action wing, Grassroots Washington. “On November 24, Secretary Reed said he would use his rule making authority to ensure absentee ballots and provisional ballots are treated the same across the state. These eleven rules changes do not do that!”

Williams called on the SOS to adopt WACs that would require reconciliation between the number of ballots and the number of eligible voters; more security measures at the polls; a color coded system for ballots; and an end to political parties being given access to the names of provisional voters.

Williams also noted that all eleven proposed rules fail to cite the current law (RCW 29A). Many of the changes suggested by EFF are required by law under the 2003 election reform package, yet the SOS apparently views them as optional.

“We’ve been told by the AG’s office that ‘shall’ really doesn’t mean ‘shall,’” said SOS representative Sheryl Moss, who manages the Certification and Training Program in the State Elections Division. Moss permitted “limited testimony” from Mr. Williams, but appeared not to recognize the urgency in making any real changes immediately. “I anticipate there will be proposed legislation on the subject, so we [SOS] will be waiting to see what the legislature enacts,” she said.Williams disagrees: “With spring elections rapidly approaching and the possibility of a recount still at hand, these changes need to made now!”

COMMENTSPosted by Boonie at January 26, 2005 09:29 PM

People get that illegal votes shouldn't be counted; it appeals to their sense of fairness.Talk about mystery ballots, and you lose them.

Posted by South County at January 26, 2005 09:33 PM

But Stefan, don't you KNOW that all those people voted for Rossi anyway, so it wouldn't affect the outcome of the election?

Posted by Howard Hirsch at January 26, 2005 09:37 PM

Hopefully in addition to these 737 - there are many that they are not talking about publicly. I agree South County, lack of fair play doesn't sit well with Washington voters - other than those perpetrating this fraud of an election of course.

Posted by CP at January 26, 2005 09:38 PM

It is heart warming to see that none of the dead people voted twice. Their restraint is to be commended.

Perhaps we should commend the many felons who didn't vote also, unless their reason for not voting is that they were back in the slammer or not yet on work release.

Posted by Keith at January 26, 2005 09:44 PM

Nice - I look forward to see what else surfaces before Feb 4.

If you check the pulse of King Co liberal nazi's on the Times opinion page, they believe the best solution is to give felons their voting rights back as soon as they are released.

It's Official: Josef's Public Journal ENDORSES Recalling SecState Sam Reed

2005-01-25T18:40:00.000-08:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005/01/its-official-josefs-public-journal.html

NEWSFLASH: JOSEF'S PUBLIC JOURNAL SUPPORTS THE RECALL

"Bring On Recallington"Somewhere in the Blogosphere - Josef of Josef's Public Journal is declaring his support of the recall of Sam Reed from Secretary of State (SecState) for, "his gross malfeasance in certifying the election before ballots were correlated to voters by a margin less than the spread between the two gubernatorial candidates".

As he blogged about HERE, SecState Reed certified the 2004 gubernatorial election without waiting for ballot reconciliation. This turned out to be a gross mistake, for hundreds - if not thousands - more ballots than voters existed in an election decided by 129 votes.

"This shouldn't be that much of a shock. HERE Laura Ruderman, Democratic candidate for Secretary of State documented SecState Reed's failings... before 2 November 2004. Maybe a few people should have listened. But for now, very respectfully: The time has came and went for SecState Reed to go and Republicans to put their bloody 11th Commandment in the shredder," roars Josef the Dinocrat.

Roaring some more, he says: "But oh, there's more. The official Recall Sam Reed blog - http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com - HERE spells out the leggy casus belli to smoke this guy. If anybody should be told this after Christine Gregoire it's Sam Reed: "WE'RE COMING, YOU'RE GOING, DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU ON THE WAY OUT!" (Actual US Senator John F. Kerry quote posted by a Kerry-Edwards Dinocrat)

Also, knowing that another Kerry-Edwards Democrat like Mike Murphy and potentially or if the Lt. Gov'r has to take the Governor's chair from the Governor-PRETEND, then another Democrat like Brian Sonntag could get it, gives Josef more reason than ever to press on.

"The State Constitution spells out that SecState Reed being recall means a step-up for the guy directly under him, namely State Treasurer Mike Murphy," says a reassured Josef.

He finally has a simple message for his beloved Defense Secretary: "MARUMMY: HELP IS ON THE WAY!"

Washington State Michael J. Murphy, State Treasurer, would succeed Sam Reed

2005-01-24T17:46:00.000-08:00

ARTICLE III of the Washington State Constitution, “THE EXECUTIVE,” Section 1, establishes the following order of succession: (1) governor, (2) lieutenant governor, (3) secretary of state, (4) treasurer, (5) auditor, (6) attorney general, (7) superintendent of public instruction, and (8) a commissioner of public lands.

Therefore, in the event the Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed is successfully recalled by the people of Washington State, his replacement, as established in the Washington State Constitution, will be the Washington State Treasurer, Michael J. Murphy.

In the event the State Treasurer cannot serve as Secretary of State, the Secretary of State’s Office would be filled by the State Auditor (Brian Sonntag), State Attorney General (Rob McKenna), Superintendent of Public Instruction (Terry Bergeson), or the Commissioner of Public Lands (Mike Cooper).

Evidence supporting Petition for Recall of Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed

2005-01-24T04:21:00.000-08:00

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb200951.php

Charge 1

King County alone counted approximately 1,800 more votes than the number of people who actually voted. Mr. Reed was aware of this discrepancy before the certification date.

1. ‘Doubts linger as Gregoire win certified’, Seattle Times, 12/31/04

“But the issue of mismatched numbers in King County came as a surprise to him. And while he said some discrepancy is not unusual as counties reconcile records after an election, the number in King County is large enough that he sent a staff member to investigate.”

2. ‘GOP seeks criminal records’ Seattle Times, 1/14/05 “Republicans also included in their case evidence of errors in King County, including an 1,800-vote gap between the number of ballots cast and the list of voters, and 348 mishandled provisional ballots.”

3. ‘PRESS RELEASE, January 20, 2005, EFF launches two new projects to ensure free and fair elections in Washington state’

“A soon-to-be-released report will detail VIP’s investigation, which has uncovered or substantiated some startling and disappointing facts. Among them: More than 55,000 ballots "enhanced" by election workers; more ballots counted than cast; newly "discovered" ballots illegally added to the count; voting by felons, dead people and the homeless; 3,500 duplicate absentee ballots sent in King County; some military ballots sent too late; violation of privacy rights; improper election certification; etc.”

4.The Wall Street Journal January 12, 2005 WSJ

“Mr. Rossi certainly has a mountain of evidence on his side. In December, officials in King County...discovered 573 "erroneously rejected" absentee ballots, plus another 150 uncounted ones that showed up in a South Seattle warehouse. There were reports that hundreds of voters were registered in storage rental facilities and private mailboxes, that felons had voted, and that military ballots were sent out too late to be counted. Then we learned that several hundred provisional ballots had simply been fed into voting machines, making it impossible to authenticate their legality. Now it turns out the number of votes cast in King County exceeds the total number of voters by about 1,800.”

5. ‘Tuesday, 09:16 A.M. Pacific ‘New error found in vote tally’ January 11, 2005, Seattle Times

"Oops — never mind. Three days after King County election officials explained most of a controversial discrepancy between the number of ballots cast and voters known to have voted, the gap has grown again. After whittling the discrepancy from 3,539 votes to 1,217 last week, officials yesterday said they had made a mistake. The number of votes now unaccounted for is "somewhere around 1,800," county Elections Superintendent Bill Huennekens said yesterday.”

Charge 2

After election day (11/2/04) King County "discovered" additional ballots 9 different times (as of 01/10/2005); Mr. Reed was aware of this anomaly before the certification date.

1. The Wall Street Journal ^ January 12, 2005 WSJ

“Mr. Rossi certainly has a mountain of evidence on his side. In December, officials in King County...discovered 573 "erroneously rejected" absentee ballots, plus another 150 uncounted ones that showed up in a South Seattle warehouse. There were reports that hundreds of voters were registered in storage rental facilities and private mailboxes, that felons had voted, and that military ballots were sent out too late to be counted. Then we learned that several hundred provisional ballots had simply been fed into voting machines, making it impossible to authenticate their legality. Now it turns out the number of votes cast in King County exceeds the total number of voters by about 1,800.”

2. ‘Other counties added votes in recount’ Tuesday, December 21, 2004, Seattle PI

“But according to filings with the high court, at least five other counties added ballots to recounts that weren't included in their original gubernatorial tallies. That means, depending on the state Supreme Court's decision, the counties may have to recount yet again, the Secretary of State's Office said yesterday.”

“State Elections Director Nick Handy said in an affidavit that at least five other counties found ballots and added them into recounts.”“Snohomish County found 224 valid ballots buried under empty mail trays. They weren't included in the original count, but the county canvassing board added them to the machine recount.”

“Meanwhile King County elections officials yesterday scrutinized another batch of ballots that could affect the race. One by one for more than five hours yesterday, more than 1,600 ballots cast by voters were held up to the glare of lights -- to be inspected, vetted and otherwise interpreted by the county's three-member canvassing board. The ballots -- all of which had been previously tabulated by voting machines in the initial election and an ensuing machine-recount -- were votes that elections workers conducting a third and final count of King County ballots could not determine voter's intent.”

“Also yesterday, the King County Canvassing Board chose to wait to decide until the Supreme Court issues its ruling on whether another batch of controversial ballots -- 20 absentee ballots and two provisional ballots -- should be part of the county's recount. Those 22 ballots were discovered only last week in the side bins of voting machine base units left at some polling places. At this point, county elections workers can't confirm if those ballots were always secure.”

Charge 3

In King County Poll workers admitted they fed at least 348 provisional ballots directly into counting machines, commingling them with legal ballots and circumventing the process of keeping them out of the count until they were canvassed and proven to be legal. Mr. Reed was aware of this violation before the date of certification.

1. ‘GOP seeks criminal records’ Seattle Times, 1/14/05

“Republicans also included in their case evidence of errors in King County, including an 1,800-vote gap between the number of ballots cast and the list of voters, and 348 mishandled provisional ballots.”

2. The Wall Street Journal January 12, 2005 WSJ

“Mr. Rossi certainly has a mountain of evidence on his side. In December, officials in King County...discovered 573 "erroneously rejected" absentee ballots, plus another 150 uncounted ones that showed up in a South Seattle warehouse. There were reports that hundreds of voters were registered in storage rental facilities and private mailboxes, that felons had voted, and that military ballots were sent out too late to be counted. Then we learned that several hundred provisional ballots had simply been fed into voting machines, making it impossible to authenticate their legality. Now it turns out the number of votes cast in King County exceeds the total number of voters by about 1,800.”

3. ‘Tuesday, 09:16 A.M. Pacific

‘New error found in vote tally’ January 11, 2005, Seattle Times“ In addition to the approximately 1,800 votes county officials can't account for, Logan said up to 348 voters improperly put provisional ballots into counting machines at polling places before their signatures or eligibility had been verified.”

Charge 4

Elections workers "enhanced" more than 55,000 ballots, and contrary to state law, they permanently obscured the original marks on many, preventing a review of their decisions; Mr. Reed was aware of this violation before the date of certification.

1. ‘PRESS RELEASE, January 20, 2005, EFF launches two new projects to ensure free and fair elections in Washington state’

“A soon-to-be-released report will detail VIP’s investigation, which has uncovered or substantiated some startling and disappointing facts. Among them: More than 55,000 ballots "enhanced" by election workers; more ballots counted than cast; newly "discovered" ballots illegally added to the count; voting by felons, dead people and the homeless; 3,500 duplicate absentee ballots sent in King County; some military ballots sent too late; violation of privacy rights; improper election certification; etc.”

2. ‘Florida Northwest, Will Democrats steal the Washington governorship?’John Fund, Monday, November 29, 2004

“More than 700 previously uncounted ballots were added to the county's total after election officials "enhanced" them to better divine voter intent. When optical scan machines didn't accept ballots, workers would fill in ovals on ballots or create duplicate ballots if they felt the voter had meant to register a choice. Hanging chads, meet empty ovals. Through this process, Ms. Gregoire gained 245 votes in King County, dwarfing the shifts to either candidate in any other county.”

3. ‘A governor by Christmas?’ November 29, 2004, Seattle Times

“Republican leaders were angered by King County's handling of ballots that were rejected by the counting machines due to voter errors. In many cases, election workers were trying to determine voter intent and then duplicating, or "enhancing," the ballots so they could be tallied.”

Charge 5

There are at least 557 names in the January 7, 2004 King County Voter Data Base for people who voted on Nov. 2,2004 but who weren't listed in the November 1, 2004 King County Voter Data Base. Only 94 of the 557 names are in the December 29, 2004 King County Voter Data Base. 280 of the 557 are shown to have registered on dates between June 7, 2004 and Oct. 2, 2004, yet their names did not appear in any of the earlier versions of the King County voter databases. Mr. Reed was aware of this serious discrepancy before the certification date.

1. ‘557 Magical Mystery People’ Sound Politics 1/08/05

“Here's another fascinating discovery from the latest King County voter file.[I now have four versions of the King County voter registration file, cut on June 1, Nov. 1, Dec. 29, 2004 and Jan. 7, 2005.] There are 557 names in the Jan. 7 file for people who supposedly voted on Nov. 2, but who weren't listed in the Nov. 1 file. Only 94 of the 557 are in the Dec. 29 file. There are a number of pre-2004 registration dates among the 557, but many of these aren't in the June file. 280 of the 557 are shown to have registered on dates between Jun 7, 2004 and Oct. 2, 2004, yet did not appear in any of the earlier versions of the King County voter databases.”

Charge 6

Seattle's Precinct 1823 counted 343 ballots, which is 71 more ballots than the 272 voters who cast them. This is the single largest discrepancy between ballots and voters in all of King County. Nearly all of the discrepancy is due to "provisional ballots". Mr. Reed was aware of this serious inconsistency before the date of certification.

1. Sound Politics 1/01/2005

“Seattle's Precinct 1823 counted 343 ballots, which is 71 more ballots than the 272 voters who cast them. This is the single largest discrepancy between ballots and voters in all of King County. Nearly all of the discrepancy is due to "provisional ballots".”

Charge 7

In violation of WAC 434-262-080, WAC 434-262-090 and WAC 434-262-100, Mr. Reed accepted, as complete, the abstract of votes from 24 counties even though they did not provide all the material required by statute and regulations.

1. ‘POLICY HIGHLIGHTER Volume 15, Number 2, January 13, 2005, Evergreen Freedom Foundation’

‘Secretary of State improperly certified election’

On January 5, EFF requested a copy of each county's certified abstract of the recount in accordance with WAC 434-262-080. The documents provided in response were received January 11. The information was available on January 7, but EFF staff was informed that an attorney had to review it first. This legal review apparently occurred around 3 p.m. on January 11, after the legislature had certified the gubernatorial election.

Not provided, however, was the "written narrative documenting errors and discrepancies discovered and corrective action taken." The Secretary of State says no written narratives have been provided by the counties which means one of two things: 1) counties are in violation of WAC 434-262-080, or 2) no "errors and discrepancies" or "corrective action" occurred.

Among the records that were provided:

1. Clark County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

2. Garfield County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

3. King County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

The following counties' vote abstracts failed to include the county seal as required by WAC 434-262-070 and 080: Adams, Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Grant, Grays Harbor, Island, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lewis, Mason, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Skagit, Snohomish, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla and Whitman. In certifying the manual recount despite these violations, the Secretary of State was not in compliance with state law.

Charge 8

Reed violated RCW 29A.04.610 by failing to perform many of the duties detailed therein, including;

A) Failure to examine and test voting systems for certification;
B) Failure to employ standards and procedures to ensure the accurate tabulation and canvassing of ballots;
C) Failure to ensure consistency among the counties of the state in the preparation of ballots, the operation of vote tallying systems, and the canvassing of primaries and elections;
D) Failure to ensure procedures to receive and distribute voter registration applications by mail;
E) Failure to engage in the testing, approval, and certification of voting systems;
F) Failure to enforce standards and procedures to prevent fraud and to facilitate the accurate processing and canvassing of absentee ballots and mail ballots;
G) Failure to enforce uniformity among the counties of the state in the conduct of absentee voting and mail ballot elections;
H) Failure to implement standards and procedures to accommodate out-of-state voters, overseas voters, and service voters;
I) Failure to enforce procedures for conducting a statutory recount;

1. Articles and Documents listed in Charge 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 9.

2. ‘Untested voting systems used, State let seven counties bypass checks for federal standards’ Saturday, January 8, 2005, Seattle Post Intelligencer

“Voting systems in King, Pierce, Snohomish and four other counties skipped typically required testing procedures before being used in last fall's elections. But although the systems weren't tested to ensure they properly functioned to federal standards, Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed said he's confident they tallied and recorded ballots accurately. The lack of outside testing "didn't affect the way the ballots were counted in King County or anywhere else," Reed, a Republican, said this week.”

Charge 9

Failure to withhold certification of the third, final and manual recount of the November 2, 2004 election, an election he knew was wrought with violations of election laws and regulations.

1.‘Doubts linger as Gregoire win certified’, Seattle Times, 12/31/04

“Reed. A Republican, said the election was fair. He said there were serious errors in the initial count and two recounts, but that the system worked well and those problems were fixed.”

“But why did he certify the election if the numbers are in doubt? “What I signed was a certification for the numbers that were submitted to us by the counties,” he said. “I am not in a judicial or an investigative role here.”

2.’Secretary of State releases review of King County elections, News ReleaseIssued: February 13, 2003' Secretary of State Sam Reed“The problems that surfaced in King County during last year’s election cycle threatened the fundamental right to vote,” said Reed. “The citizens of this state are counting on King County to embrace change, implement solutions and administer successful elections in the future.”

“In December, the Secretary of State’s Office interviewed King County employees, voting system vendors, and representatives from the U.S. Post Office. The Secretary of State has concluded the mailing delays were caused by a combination of factors. The most important was King County’s difficulty in programming the system it uses to lay out ballots prior to printing.”

A stolen election in Washington state?

2005-01-22T10:43:00.000-08:00

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:cFW68sfDtNAJ:boards.biography.com/thread.jspa%3FthreadID%3D100004835%26messageID%3D100027417+%27sam+reed+recall%27&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

In Washington state, the errors by election officials have been compared to the antics of Inspector Clouseau, only clumsier. At least 1,200 more votes were counted in Seattle's King County than the number of individual voters who can be accounted for. Other counties saw similar, albeit smaller, excess vote totals. More than 300 military personnel who were sent their absentee ballots too late to return them have signed affidavits saying they intended to vote for Mr. Rossi. Some 1 out of 20 ballots in King County that officials felt were marked unclearly were "enhanced" with Wite-Out or pens so that some had their original markings obliterated.

Most disturbing is the revelation last week by King County officials that at least 348 unverified provisional ballots were fed directly into vote-counting machines. "Did it happen? Yes. Unfortunately, that's part of the process in King County," elections superintendent Bill Huennekens told the Seattle Times. "It's a very human process, and in some cases that did happen."

King County elections director Dean Logan, Mr. Huennekens' boss, also concedes the discrepancy between the number of ballots cast and the list of people who are recorded as voting. Even though the gap is 1,200 votes, he says, "that does not clearly indicate that the election would have turned out differently." Are voters supposed to trust an election merely because it can't "clearly" be shown to be hopelessly tainted? Mr. Logan is certainly singing a different tune now than he was on Nov. 18, when he responded to charges of voting irregularities in an e-mail to colleagues, which read in part: "Unfortunately, I have come to expect this kind of unsubstantiated crap. It's all too convenient, if not now fashionable, to stoop to this level when there is a close race."

Slade Gorton, a Republican former state attorney general and U.S. senator who is advising Mr. Rossi, says a court should order a revote rather than declare valid one of the two earlier vote counts that Mr. Rossi won. "No one can govern effectively under the cloud this race has created," Mr. Gorton says. He notes that state law doesn't require any showing of fraud to contest an election. "That is irrelevant to whether the election should be done over," he says. "The law is quite clear in giving a court the right to void any election where the number of illegal or mistaken votes exceeds the margin of victory, and it has done so in the past."

Mr. Gorton notes that Sam Reed, the Republican secretary of state who certified Ms. Gregoire's victory, issued a report in 2003 noting that King County's sloppy election procedures could lead to just this sort of election meltdown. "The county is not consistent in their ballot enhancement procedures," Mr. Reed's report concluded. "Ballot enhancement, while done in full view of political observers, did not use the procedures outlined in the Washington Administrative Code. Inconsistencies in how this procedure is handled significantly increase the possibility of a successful election contest."

Much of the evidence uncovered on King County's flouting of election laws first appeared on Soundpolitics.com, a blog run by computer consultant Stefan Sharkansky. A former liberal who worked for Michael Dukakis in 1988, Mr. Sharkansky calls himself a "9/11 conservative mugged by reality." He uses his knowledge of statistics and probability to illustrate how unlikely some of the reported vote count changes are. He also uncovered the fact that in Precinct 1823 in downtown Seattle, 527, or 70%, of the 763 registered voters used 500 Fourth Avenue - the King County administration building - as their residential address. A full 61% of the precinct's voters only registered in the last year, and nearly all of them "live" at 500 Fourth Avenue. By contrast, only 13% of all of King County voters registered in 2004.

Not all of the voters at the county building are homeless or hard to find. A noted local judge and her husband have been registered at the county building for years. When I called her to ask why, she became flustered and said it was because of security concerns, specifically because "the Mexican mafia are out to get me." When I pointed out that her home address and phone number were easily found on the Internet and in property records, she ended the conversation by refusing to answer a question about whether she had improperly voted for state legislative candidates who would represent the county building but not her residence.

Recall push yields new petition

2005-01-22T10:27:00.000-08:00

http://theolympian.com/home/news/20050120/topstories/72345.shtml

BRAD SHANNON THE OLYMPIAN

01/22/05

Activists angry about how the governor's race was handled have filed a new petition seeking to recall Secretary of State Sam Reed.

The petition, which has more details than an earlier version, now will be sent to the Attorney General's Office for review and a potential hearing before a judge to determine its sufficiency, according to Joanie Nacke, spokeswoman for Reed's office.

Martin Ringhofer, a resident of King and Grant counties, started the petition after growing dissatisfied with Reed's certification of the governor's race results, giving Democrat Christine Gregoire the victory by 129 votes over Republican Dino Rossi.

Ringhofer is convinced, just as Rossi's legal team is, that election errors contributed to Gregoire's win and that a new election is needed to restore voter confidence in the system. Reed, a Republican, has said before through his spokesmen that he isn't concerned. Nacke repeated that assessment Wednesday.

"I honestly don't think anyone is taking it that seriously," Nacke said.

Nacke said she based that on "all the editorials that have come out in support" of Reed and discounting the recall.

Ringhofer has created a Web site at recallreedblog. blogspot.com to further the campaign. He said in a news release this week that he hopes to collect 665,000 valid signatures of voters to force the recall election.

"Forget the hanging chad. Here in Washington, we have dead people voting, felons voting. We have more votes than we have people who voted. We have ballots being found under tables, elections workers guessing how 55,000 voters really meant to vote if only they had been smart enough to fill in that bubble," Ringhofer said in a written statement.

An attorney has been assigned to write the petition and title that would be forwarded to a Superior Court judge for review, said Jim Pharris, a senior assistant attorney general. The agency has 15 days to do that.

"You can't recall someone just because you don't like them anymore. It has to be something that would amount to official misconduct," Pharris said.

"You don't have to prove it's true, but the allegation, if true, has to be sufficient" to qualify as misfeasance or malfeasance by the official.

It's not clear if Reed can be recalled in his second term for actions he took in his first term. Reed certified the last of the election results last month.

"It could be a legal question," Pharris said.

Brad Shannon is political editor of The Olympian. He can be reached at 360-753-1688 or mailto:beshanno@olympia.gannett.com

Critics Of Reed File Recall Petition

2005-01-20T02:47:00.000-08:00

http://www.kirotv.com/politics/4104223/detail.html

POSTED: 11:11 am PST January 18, 2005

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- Critics of Secretary of State Sam Reed say they have filed a recall petition.

Sponsors Martin Ringhofer and Linda Jordan said Reed failed to withhold certification of the governor's election. They said he knew it was wrought with violations of election laws and regulations.

The recall campaign hopes to collect most of the 665,000 signatures through the Web site http://www.recallreedblog.blogspot.com.

Copyright 2005 by KIROTV.com.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. All rights reserved

We have grown to 510 visits and 800 page views in one week

2005-01-20T01:16:00.000-08:00

http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com
by Martin D. Ringhofer
Email me!

Launched seven days ago on 01/12/05, with ten visits the first 24 hours, this blog has grown to nearly 160 visits in the past 24 hours. We have had a growing number of e-mails and contacts, all expressing strong support and appreciation for filing the petition calling for the recall of Sam Reed. All in all, we have grown to 510 visits and 800 page views in one week.

A press release has just gone out on PRWeb which goes out to thousands of media and press outlets. If you want to see the release, go to: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb199740.php. This site allows anyone to forward to his or her friends, co-workers, and acquaintances at the easy click of the mouse.

A word of appreciation goes to Stefan Sharkansky from http://soundpolitics.com who on short notice took time out of his very busy schedule on Sunday 01/09/2005 to meet with me for a half hour to give me some tips on how to start a blog to follow his lead for my hometown of Soap Lake in Grant County. Having had no previous experience in this arena, Stefan’s tips, suggestions and encouragement guided me to create a blog for my hometown, http://soaplakepolitics.blogspot.com. Though the visits have been much more modest, the blog is already carrying news and information about Soap Lake and Grant County unavailable through the local mainstream media outlets.

Without Stefan’s unselfish assistance, the Soap Lake blog would not have happened. It is my goal to follow your example of openness, integrity, and honesty, as we grow the flow of information to those who hunger for news about the communities, and become an outlet for two way communications you have so eloquently shown us all as the way of the future. Stefan: Thank you! Little did I know a little over a week ago that what started with getting the Soap Lake Blog up would end up in the creation of http://recallreedblog.blogspot.com.

Here are some of the e-mails we’ve received:

“Through some web searching I understand that you are as mad as my husband and myself about this election. I am with you on the recall of Sam Reed and if there is any petition I can sign to help get him out of office please let me know. Much of my family feels the same way and we want this state to be an honest state, not a dictatorship where elections are set.”

“I voted for Sam Reed but his true colors have shown thru in the way he handled this mess. I agree 100% that he should be recalled. I do hope, though that you will provide a printable petition that can be mailed in.”

“I want you to know that you have my support. I’m waiting to fill out this petition for recall and submit it. Let’s get Reed and Gregoire out of there! Let’s clean it up!”

“I convey to you all my hopes and prayers for this recall of WA SoS Sam Reed to be successful in addition to my hopes & prayers for the court to order a revote in WA to rectify the grossly tainted & fraudulent election of Christine Gregoire.”

“There are thousands of WA residents who do not vote because they do not meet the narrow definition of the program. I tried to get the law changed but after two years I got nowhere. In WA it is against both state and federal law to set up classes of recipients. This is another reason to Recall Reed.”

“Great job on the recall drive! Also yes, I was reading through the latest SoundPolitics and saw your post on the recall drive... great post. “

Thank you all for your generous support as we move forward on this effort. Some have labeled this effort in many ways, none of which are even close to how it all came together. If it had not been for the story which appeared in Saturday’s January 8th Post Intelligencer, featuring a photograph of me holding up a deck of about 40 absentee ballots which King County Elections and Records had been sending to me, 8 years after both my dear parents died: I doubt I’d be involved in much of this. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/207617_reed13.html The response I got to that at work, friends, family, old friends I had not heard from for ten years, was simply mind-boggling. All had the same gut reaction to what we were witnessing before our eyes, helpless bystanders. All said: no, enough is enough, we got to do something. So we did, and we are.

Besides Stefan’s soundpolitics.com, there is John Carlson, and Kirby Wilbur on KVI, Mike Siegel on KTTH, and dozens of brave citizens whose outrage continues to grow and will not go away until this mess is cleaned up and fixed. Promises of “tomorrow, tomorrow” won’t cut it this time. We are a proud nation governed by laws, not dictated by those we entrust to represent us and when caught doing wrong have every excuse in the book that they only followed orders. There still are some of us left who have studied history, and these excuses today sound just like the excuses told at the Nuremberg trials after the Nazis were virtually allowed to exterminate 6 million innocent human beings. No. Following orders does not cut it, Sam. The RCW’s and the WAC’s are clear. Sam Reed should not have certified the third recount; and once certified, there was more then ample evidence that should have compelled Sam Reed to de-certify… but that was not to be.

For those who are not comfortable at the prospect of a recall election of Sam Reed: there is nothing to lose any sleep over. First, it will be the court that decides if there is sufficient evidence of wrong doing to warrant a recall election. And if the court renders such a decision, it requires 660,000 registered voters who will clearly be scrutinized of their eligibility to cast a “legitimate” vote, whether Sam deserves to get a pink slip. Should we make the cut on that, a campaign will ensure to give all the citizens to make the decision to keep Sam in office, or ask him to retire… and let someone else have his job.

Keep the faith, and don’t be angry, upset, or frustrated. We live in the greatest nation on earth, and together we will forge a more perfect republic and a democracy where all those entitled to legally vote can have their vote counted; those who are not by law entitled are given an opportunity to become a naturalized citizen, and gain the right to vote; those who have lost it can regain it by following legal avenues. Never again ought the members of our armed forces have their vote taken away as it was in this election. And, as to the dead – those who violated a loved one who has died by voting for them deserve public ridicule and some sort of punishment to let it be known: that will never be tolerated again.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb199777

Yes, Sam Reed failed his job, totally.

2005-01-19T17:54:00.000-08:00

http://www.horsesass.org/my-comments-popup.php?p=286&c=1

YES, Sam Reed failed in his job, totally.

After the first vote when we knew there was going to be a recount, by automatic kick in from election laws, Reed did not size up the situation with any wisdom. Stong, precise, detailed information on how to proceed with total uniformity in all cased, in all matters, for all counties, THAT was the call of the day- stictly enforced by the august Sec. of State. Imposed, enforced, totally uniform standards, on all counties- and he has that power.

Sam wimped out- too bad. There was a lot at stake for voters, for him, and the body politic, Sam has a lot of experience in elections, decades, all the resouces and experts in the world at his call, he wimped out in his moment of fame. Second class stuff in my opinion. Not leadership.

This is no time to be slow-dancing on voting reform

2005-01-19T17:50:00.000-08:00

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/207913_capitol16.html

By THOMAS SHAPLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

OLYMPIA -- State legislators should quit worrying about Gov. Christine Gregoire's legitimacy and start worrying about their own.
An old Capitol hand offered this advice on divining lawmakers' intent: "Don't listen to the music; watch 'em dance."

Republicans and Democrats spent the first few days of the session dancing a partisan tango, an artificial rose of election credibility clenched in their teeth.
"We've got work to do," Democrats argued against delaying the confirmation of Gregoire's election.

Yes, and the first task is election reform. They've got to get to work, and fast, on not only the reforms that we've long known were needed but also the reforms the recent election has proved are needed.

How quickly and successfully lawmakers move on these reforms will be one good measure of their legitimate concern for the interests of their constituents.

Election reform is a hot public issue, and the interest is not limited to sore-loser Dino Rossi fans or rabble-rousing bloggers. Constituents are saying, you want to do something for us; you want to fix something? Fix this.

Legislators of both political stripes have their own specific stakes in this. Republicans bemoaned the fact that members of the military -- fighting, bleeding and dying for their country -- received their absentee ballots too late to vote (although county elections records indicate the ballots were mailed by the federal deadline). The first and best way to fix that is to give more time to get all the absentee ballots mailed out by moving the date of the primary back, say, to June. Secretaries of state have proposed that for years, and Republican Rep. Mike Armstrong told me he got a bill passed in the House last year only to have it die in the Senate.

Political integrity would seem to demand that legislation to change the primary date garner a host of votes from minority Republicans. And it will be a gut test for incumbents in both caucuses because it could erode some of the incumbent advantage in election contests.
Republicans, too, should already be asking themselves what changes should or even could be made in time to affect the revote of the governor's election that so many of them have been rooting for. How about those brave men and women in uniform? Can we get ballots to them for a timely revote, and how?

Democrats don't dare slack off on election reform unless they're interested only in sweeping under the rug the lingering concerns over the legitimacy of Gregoire's victory. If it needs to be fixed, it must be broken, right? But does agreeing that it needs to be fixed amount to admitting that their candidate came to power via a broken process?

For her part, Gregoire exhibited a tin ear to the public mood over the election by announcing her appointment of a task force, giving it until the session is well more than one-third over to come up with suggestions for improvement and then picking Sam Reed to lead it.
Don't misunderstand. Reed is an honorable man who has handled this troubled election with commendable even-handedness.

"There are some people," Reed has said, "who have been dismayed that I wasn't a Katherine Harris who took the position, 'I'm a Republican, and by God that comes first.' "

Well, by God he didn't. And that's gotten him in hot water with many fellow Republicans (compare the whoops and hollers the Republican side of the aisle gave incoming Attorney General Rob McKenna on inauguration day to the tepid claps for Reed). Reed is even the target of a nascent recall campaign.

It wouldn't be unreasonable for even those with casual concerns about the election to question Reed as watchdog when it's the election process over which he presided that's been deemed to need watching.

Reed is wrong for the election oversight task and March 1 is too long to wait for legislators to get started rewriting election laws.

Don't waltz when you should be boot-scootin'.

Thomas Shapley is an editorial writer and member of the P-I Editorial Board. E-mail: thomasshapley@seattlepi.com.

Could a recall happen here? State's tougher rules aim to prevent California-style circus

2005-01-19T17:39:00.000-08:00

Originally published Tuesday, September 2, 2003

http://www.theolympian.com/home/specialsections/Election2003/20030902/90008.shtml

As California's state government is rocked by the spectacle of the recall attempt against Gov. Gray Davis, some in Washington wonder if the same thing could happen here.

Washington, like California and 17 other states, has a system in place to recall a governor or any other elected official. But elections officials say the system here is more orderly, with a higher bar for recalling officials from office.

The California and Washington systems "are certainly based on the same premise, which is that the people do have the right to recall an elected official," Secretary of State Sam Reed said. "But ours is much more rigorous."

Many political commentators have slammed California's laws for making it almost comically easy to mount a recall campaign against the governor.

In that state, recall supporters needed to collect 897,158 signatures to put the recall on the ballot, or 12 percent of the number of voters in the most recent gubernatorial election, a small number for a state with more than 34 million residents.

By contrast, in Washington signatures are required from 35 percent of the number of people who voted in the last election of the official being recalled. For instance, if someone were to mount a recall campaign against Gov. Gary Locke, they'd first need to gather about 864,000 signatures -- a large percentage of the state's 3.3 million registered voters.

In Washington's history of citizen voter drives, the most signatures ever gathered for a single ballot measure was for 1973's Initiative 282, which rolled back legislative pay increases. Lynnwood furniture salesman Bruce Helm collected about 699,000 signatures for that effort.

"Especially in a statewide race, you would just be behind the 8-ball immediately," said anti-tax activist Tim Eyman, a veteran of statewide initiative campaigns. Eyman thinks the number of signatures needed should be lower.

The task is somewhat easier for local elected officials, where fewer people vote in the elections. Two of the more notable recent recall efforts were against local officials:

- In the early 1970s, a Seattle firefighters union sponsored a recall drive against then-Mayor Wes Uhlman, who they felt was not properly funding the department. Voters kept Uhlman in office.

- In 1981, a group of angry Democrats tried to recall King County state Sen. Pete Von Reichbauer after he switched from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. Again, the effort failed, and Von Reichbauer now serves on the King County Council.

Past efforts

There has never been a recall vote against a statewide elected official in Washington's history, said John Pearson, the deputy director of elections in Reed's office.

There was a brief but intense effort in 1926 to recall then-Gov. Roland Hartley, a Republican who was thought to have engineered the firing of popular University of Washington President Henry Suzzallo after the two clashed over higher education funding.

According to a 1996 report by The Seattle Times, both the Times and the Post-Intelligencer launched campaigns in support of a recall movement against Hartley, but it quickly withered due to lack of support outside of Seattle.

"Nothing ever made it to the ballot," Pearson said. Hartley went on to lose a re-election bid in 1932.

In 1984, when Reed was Thurston County auditor, he was growing frustrated with a succession of recall attempts against city government officials in Rainier, efforts he characterized as "mostly losing candidates trying to recall the people who beat them."

Reed joined with the Spokane County auditor in requesting legislation to set another blockade.

Under the successful legislation, every recall attempt must undergo a hearing in Superior Court, with the presiding judge deciding whether the official in question is guilty of the "malfeasance or misfeasance" that the recall statute says should set the grounds for a recall.

"Since then, we've seen fewer recalls, but they've been serious ones," Reed said. "I think that's good."

No such oversight exists in California, and Reed thinks the current effort there is an aberration.

"I'm no fan of Gray Davis, but he won the election fair and square," Reed said. "For people to turn around and try to recall him just because they disagree with him or don't like him, I think it's improper."

Because most recall drives are likely to be sparked by major policy differences, Eyman said he thinks the initiative process is in large part an acceptable substitute for the ability to easily mount a recall. Between the amount of signatures needed and the legal hurdles, it would just be too difficult in Washington, Eyman said.

"It ain't gonna happen in Washington," Eyman said. "You might as well predict that rain is going to stop falling in Seattle. The system is just rigged against it."

Washington's system differs from California's in one other important way.

In California, everyone from actor Arnold Schwarzenegger to former child star Gary Coleman to syndicated columnist Arianna Huffington got onto the replacement ballot with nothing more than 65 signatures and a $3,500 filing fee.

In Washington, if an official is recalled, the normal succession process for that particular office goes into effect.

"If we recalled the governor," Reed said. "the lieutenant governor would take over

An Open Letter To The New York Times

2005-01-19T08:05:00.000-08:00

http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/index.html

One month ago, the New York Times urged Washington state to "count every vote" in our governor's race, repeating the slogan so popular among Democratic activists and editorial writers.

We now know, thanks to investigations by the Republican party, the BIAW, a building trades association, and individual bloggers, particularly Stefan Sharkansky of Sound Politics, that some counties in Washington state followed the Times' advice. For example, King County, which includes the Democratic stronghold of Seattle, counted votes from dead people, from felons, and from hundreds of provisional voters without checking. All in all, King County counted nearly 2,000 more votes than voters.

King County did not quite count every vote. They did not count 22 ballots found in voting machines after the election, and they did not count some military ballots that soldiers and Marines in Iraq received after the election. But they came close.

And so how do Washington's voters feel about this effort to "count every vote?" Polls show that a large majority of the state's voters do not consider Christine Gregoire's victory legitimate and want a re-vote. This mess provides more evidence that the correct slogan is not "count every vote," but "count every legitimate vote — once."

A citizens' revolution for clean elections, new media

2005-01-19T07:50:00.000-08:00

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002153970_sharkansky19.html

By Stefan Sharkansky

Special to The Times
Guest columnist

Christine Gregoire has said that our recent election was "a model to the rest of the nation and the world." If what she meant is that the King County Elections Office is her model of how she plans to run the state of Washington, then we should all be worried.

Is it really "good enough for government work" to count 3,500 or 2,000 more ballots than there were voters? The airlines figured out years ago how to match the number of boarding passes with the number of people sitting in the airplane. Why can't our elections officials match the number of ballots cast with the number of voters who supposedly cast them?

I think most Washingtonians agree that it isn't good enough for government work to decide an election by a box load of funny votes. It is not the American way for a tainted victory of 129 votes, marred by thousands of illegitimate votes, including double voters, felon voters, cemetery voters and unidentified voters, to take the place of a legitimate decision of the electorate.

The only fair solution is to have a new, clean election so we all can know that whoever lives in our governor's mansion has a genuine mandate from a majority of the eligible voters. Once we have a legitimate governor, the next step is for an overhaul of our elections system.

Our democracy is not built on "elections" that are artificial contests with arbitrary rules and procedures. Our democracy is built on the principle that government is subservient to the will of the people. Elections are merely a tool for measuring the will of the people.

When an election turns into a game of counting mysteriously discovered pieces of paper, you might as well just let the candidates pick a winner by playing a game of rock, scissors, paper.

And if the elections that we have today aren't good enough to measure the will of the people within the margin of sloppiness, incompetence and illegal voting, then, no, we don't just suck it up for four years with a governor we don't want. We say this is not right, this will not stand. We repair the system and we measure the will of the people again so we can have the government that it is our right to have.

Whether or not the judges allow a revote and no matter who is our governor at mid-year, the lessons of the botched 2004 election have inspired a movement for serious election reform. We can all see that our elections process, the core of our democracy, has broken down.

I dare call this movement for clean elections and legitimate government a citizens' revolution. No, this revolution is not of the scale of the American Revolution of 1776, or of the current democratic revolution unfolding in Ukraine. But it is a movement for a sweeping change in an established order. The established order of our elections system is broken and so is our confidence in our elections officials and Legislature to fix the system. The changes will come from the citizens.

It is also fitting that this citizens' revolution for clean elections is playing out not in the establishment media, but in the new media. Not in the one-way media of cocooned editorial boards and big-haired TV pontificators, but in the participatory media of talk radio and blogs.

Talk radio has its callers who talk back and every day teach the hosts and the listeners something new. Likewise, bloggers have their readers who contribute commentary and tips. Numerous stories of voting irregularities, such as the cases of dead voters that were later reported in the daily papers, were first verified and reported on blogs as the result of tips from readers. This, too, is a revolution in the established order of gathering and distributing the news.

The new participatory media have led the charge with this story because, unfortunately, our establishment media are too often partisan and credulous and as lazy and complacent as the local government they're supposed to be watching. But we Americans are a resourceful people, an inventive people, a self-reliant people. When our institutions stop serving us well, we fix the ones we can fix, and create new institutions to supplant the ones we can't fix.

That's where these two revolutions converge: the citizens' revolution for clean elections and the revolution of citizens' media. There will be election reform, but it won't be entrusted to a commission appointed by today's governor to propose peripheral changes. There will be citizen-led initiatives for meaningful reforms.

For example: requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration; requiring every voter to show both a photo ID and a pulse; and requiring that an election can be certified only if the number of votes equals the number of voters.

Stefan Sharkansky lives in Seattle and is the founder of the SoundPolitics.com Weblog. This column is adapted from a speech he gave at the Revote Rally in Olympia on Jan. 11.

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company

Secretary of State improperly certified election

2005-01-18T08:12:00.000-08:00

http://www.effwa.org/highlighters/v15_n2.php

By law, the Secretary of State (SOS) can only certify the results of a statewide election when that office receives a certified copy from each county of its abstract of votes containing specific information and an attached county seal for verification. Based on information provided by SOS in response to a public records request filed by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF), 24 of our 39 counties failed to provide all the required information for certification. Twenty-one didn't attach the county seal verifying accuracy of certification and three counties didn't even provide a sworn affidavit. Nonetheless, the Secretary of State certified the results of the manual recount.

Consider the following Secretary of State Washington Administrative Code (WAC) requirements (bolding is ours):

WAC 434-262-070: "Upon completion of the verification of the auditor's abstract of votes and the documentation of any corrective action taken, the county canvassing board shall sign a certification that the abstract is a full, true, and correct representation of the votes cast for the issues and offices listed thereon. The certification shall also state the total number of registered voters and votes cast in the county. The certification shall contain the oath required by RCW 29A.60.200, signed by the county auditor and attested to by the chairman of the board of the county legislative authority, and shall have a space where the official seal of the county shall be attached...."

WAC 434-262-080: "No later than the next business day following the certification . . . the county auditor shall send a certified copy of that part of the auditor's abstract of votes covering those issues and offices to the secretary of state. This copy must . . . have a certificate identical to that accompanying the official county canvass report, bearing the county seal and original signatures of the officers required to sign that document attached or affixed thereto. A copy of the written narrative documenting errors and discrepancies discovered and corrective action taken shall accompany the abstract if applicable...."

WAC 434-262-090: "... No county's certified copy of the abstract of votes shall be considered as complete for acceptance by the secretary of state until all of the material required by statute and regulation has been received by the secretary of state...."

WAC 434-262-100: "Upon receipt of a complete certified copy of the auditor's abstract of votes from a county auditor, the secretary of state shall proceed to include the results from that abstract in the official canvass of the primary, special, or general election prepared by that office...."

On January 5, EFF requested a copy of each county's certified abstract of the recount in accordance with WAC 434-262-080. The documents provided in response were received January 11. The information was available on January 7, but EFF staff were informed that an attorney had to review it first. This legal review apparently occurred around 3 p.m. on January 11, after the legislature had certified the gubernatorial election.

Not provided, however, was the "written narrative documenting errors and discrepancies discovered and corrective action taken." The Secretary of State says no written narratives have been provided by the counties which means one of two things: 1) counties are in violation of WAC 434-262-080, or 2) no "errors and discrepancies" or "corrective action" occurred.

Among the records that were provided:

1. Clark County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

2. Garfield County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

3. King County - No sworn affidavit was provided. The county also did not provide the total number of active registered voters in all precincts; total of inactive; total number of all registered voters and the total votes cast.

The following counties' vote abstracts failed to include the county seal as required by WAC 434-262-070 and 080: Adams, Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Grant, Grays Harbor, Island, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lewis, Mason, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Skagit, Snohomish, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla and Whitman.

In certifying the manual recount despite these violations, the Secretary of State was not in compliance with state law. Though the legislature has now certified the election, hearings should be held to determine the causes for these election violations. Those responsible must be held accountable, and corrective action must be taken immediately.

Note: EFF will be releasing a detailed election analysis in the near future identifying additional violations of state and federal election law. For more details, please visit EFF's Voter Integrity Project.

Prepared by: Bob Williams | President and Senior Research Analyst | 360.956.3482

Sam Reed's Office writes 01/05/2005

2005-01-18T07:54:00.000-08:00

The following was written by someone in SAM REEDS Office on Wed, January 5, 2005:

"We have received thousands of pieces of correspondence in the last several weeks and, unfortunately, I am only one person.

Many of your comments are in reference to the authority and jurisdiction of this office. I would invite you to review Article III, Section 17 of the Washington State Constitution and Chapter 43.07 of the Revised Code of Washington for a full description of the authority granted to Secretary Reed. If you have specific concerns regarding the State's election laws I would recommend Title 29A of the Revised Code of Washington. I have responded to the majority of your points below:

You mentioned the discrepancies in the King County. State law mandates that Elections are administered by the County. Although they are required to report and certify the number of ballots cast, the voter roles (which are the source of the current discrepancy) are not submitted to the State and are used by the County to prepare budgetary and staffing needs for future elections. It typically takes several months to reconcile the voter lists. They contain the name of any person that submitted a ballot, whether that ballot was valid, or not. Many names will not appear on the list at all due to the number of registered voters that are enrolled in the State Address Confidentiality Program. These are people that have been victims of violent crimes and whose safety requires absolute anonymity in public records.

We are continuing to monitor the discrepancies in King County. Although the office of the Secretary of State does not enjoy the policing or regulatory authority enjoyed by the Attorney General's Office, Secretary Reed has dedicated staff to investigate the problems there. Please be assured that if fraudulent votes have been found by the courts during the review of the reconciliation, then those votes will be thrown out. Both parties are well aware of state law regulating fraudulent votes and are activey reviewing the list of voters in all 39 counties.

The "certification" (what is legally referred to as filing the amended abstract of the original election results) is a legal formality recognizing that Secretary Reed has received the results of the manual recount from the 39 counties. Secretary Reed had a statutory obligation to sign the amended abstract. The action taken on the 30th of December in no way will impede either candidate, either party, or any registered voter from contesting the election results. It was simply a legally necessary step in the election process.

You expressed concern regarding the acceptance of ballots from our military personnel serving overseas. We have been assured by the County Auditors that all military ballots were mailed well within the federally recommended 45 day transit period. This has been confirmed by the Department of Justice. It is our understanding, however, that several members of our military were serving in combat zones and were unable to receive their mail. State law allowed County Auditors to accept absentee ballots from those stationed overseas until November 17th of 2004. Unfortunately, this deadline is set into state law.

Secretary Reed has advocated moving our State's September Primary Election date to an earlier month in order to allow even more transit time for ballots going to and being returned by our military voters. Secretary Reed has also worked with the Department of Defense on alternative methods of voting for military personnel including vote by fax or secured internet. Please be assured that our staff is working diligently to investigate more effective means of collecting ballots from registered voters that are residing or serving overseas. Our suggestions regarding this matter will be submitted to the 2005 Legislature with the complete package of election reform proposals.

Secretary Reed has been very careful to ensure that all of his, and his staff's, actions have strictly adhered to state and federal guidelines during this election. He has proudly upheld his sworn duty to the people, and to the Constitutions of the United States, and the great State of Washington.

If you have any further questions or concerns regarding his actions I would be happy to have a rational and respectful conversation with you at any time. Please feel free to contact me at your discretion. "

Dino Rossi Does NOT Support Recalling Secretary of State Sam Reed

2005-01-17T21:53:00.000-08:00

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005_01_09_josef-a-k_archive.html

Gov'r-ELECT Rossi Does NOT Support Recalling SecState Sam Reed

Important Recall Secretary of State Sam Reed Update:

Several times on TV and radio - including FOX NEWS Hannity and Colmes (I'll post the transcript when I can get it) and now KING 5's Up Front With Robert Mak, Governor-Elect Dino Rossi has said HERE (WMV) that, "I don't support that effort... I think it's even more difficult than a revote." Moreover, he said in that extended interview with Mr. Mak that'll be aired this weekend, have I agreed with him on everything? No. I have not agreed with him on everything but I think Sam is going to, you know, going to do his job to the best of his ability and with the information he has. Sam Reed's not the issue in this. The issue is to solve the problems that we have with our process, get a legitimate governor by having a revote and restoring the faith of the voters of the State of Washington in the process.

Now, I don't want you to get the impression I am some drone or automaton, but if the Gov'r-Elect isn't going to support this recall and says "Sam Reed's not the issue in this" - then it's DOA. Very unlikely to have a fighting chance.

The WMV also discusses some other issues - such as Gov'r-Elect Rossi's desire to fight, future political plans and more.

http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com/2005/01/govr-elect-rossi-does-not-support.html#comments

3 Comments:

At 10:30 AM, Anonymous said...

Thanks for the email alerting us to Rossi not supporting a sam reed recall. I agree it would be very hard to pull a recall effort off but that does not change the fact that Mr. Reed failed to do his duty as Secretary of State and I don't feel comfortable just letting it go. On the day he certified the election he is quoted as saying it was botched. Another time he said it was rife with "irregularities". I say it was rife with election law violations. He had every legal leg to stand on to NOT certify and indeed it was his duty to not certify.

At 1:08 PM, Anonymous said...

How can Rossi go to court to argue that the election had major election law violations and at the same time say that the guy in charge of enforcing election laws, sam reed, did his job? You can't. I think this statement could cause trouble for him. If I were the attorney against him I would argue "Why is he even here? He's stated that he thinks the Secretary of State did his job?"

At 1:25 PM, Josef K said...

To the latest Anon:

"Have I agreed with him on everything? No. I have not agreed with him on everything but I think Sam is going to, you know, going to do his job to the best of his ability and with the information he has."

Last night, Gov'r-elect Rossi said the real issue's King County.

Secretary of State Recall Petition Officially Launched

2005-01-15T13:54:00.000-08:00

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb199740.php

An effort to recall Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed officially began today.

Martin Ringhofer, who resides in King and Grant Counties and is a registered voter in Grant County, and King County resident Linda Jordan mailed a Statement of Intent to Initiate a Recall Petition to the Secretary of State Office in Olympia.

The recall effort comes after the debacle that ensued following the general election. The closest race on the ballot was between Gubernatorial candidates Dino Rossi (R) and Christine Gregoire (D). Rossi won the initial count and the machine recount but by the third hand recount Gregoire found a 129-vote lead.

In part the statement and petition charges Sam Reed with:

“Failure to withhold certification of the November 2, 2004 election, an election he knew was wrought with violations of election laws and regulations; Failure to employ standards and procedures to ensure the accurate tabulation and canvassing of ballots.”

“Forget the hanging chad. Here in Washington we have dead people voting, felons voting. We have more votes than we have voters. We have ballots being found under tables, election workers guessing how 55,000 voters really meant to vote if only they had been smart enough to fill in that bubble. The buck stops with the Secretary of State. He should never have certified such a fraudulent election,” said Martin Ringhofer.

When 665,000 valid signatures are gathered in Washington State, a special election will be held to vote on whether or not to recall Sam Reed from office.

The petition and statement can be viewed at: recallreedblog.blogspot.com.

People are encouraged to download, print and share the petition text with others but it should not be used for signature gathering until the Attorney General writes the ballot synopsis and the sufficiency of the charges are upheld in Court.

Contact: recall@comcast.net

Petition to Recall Sam Reed, Washington StateSecretaryof State

2005-01-14T07:28:00.000-08:00

Petition for Recall of Washington State Secretary of State Sam Reed
to the Honorable Rob McKenna, Attorney General

We, Linda Jordan and Martin D. Ringhofer, file this Petition demanding the Recall of Sam Reed, Washington State Secretary of State.

1. I, Linda Jordan, am a legal voter registered to vote at 4419 South Dawson Street, Seattle, WA 98118. I am qualified to vote in Washington State, County of King.

2. I, Martin D. Ringhofer, am a legal voter registered to vote at 23 Dogwood South, P.O. Box 216, Soap Lake, WA 98851. I am qualified to vote in Washington State, County of Grant.

3. We contend that Sam Reed has committed misfeasance or malfeasance in office, and/or has violated his oath of office and that these acts generally took place between November 3 , 2004 and January 1, 2005. The charges are set forth below.

CHARGE 1

King County alone counted approximately 1,800 more votes than the number of people who actually voted. Mr. Reed was aware of this discrepancy before the certification date.

CHARGE 2

After election day (11/2/04) King County "discovered" additional ballots 9 different times (as of 01/10/2005); Mr. Reed was aware of this anomaly before the certification date.

CHARGE 3

In King County Poll workers admitted they fed at least 348 provisional ballots directly into counting machines, commingling them with legal ballots and circumventing the process of keeping them out of the count until they were canvassed and proven to be legal. Mr. Reed was aware of this violation before the date of certification.

CHARGE 4

Elections workers "enhanced" more than 55,000 ballots, and contrary to state law, they permanently obscured the original marks on many, preventing a review of their decisions; Mr. Reed was aware of this violation before the date of certification.

CHARGE 5

There are at least 557 names in the January 7, 2004 King County Voter Data Base for people who voted on Nov. 2,2004 but who weren't listed in the November 1, 2004 King County Voter Data Base. Only 94 of the 557 names are in the December 29, 2004 King County Voter Data Base. 280 of the 557 are shown to have registered on dates between June 7, 2004 and Oct. 2, 2004, yet their names did not appear in any of the earlier versions of the King County voter databases. Mr. Reed was aware of this serious discrepancy before the certification date.

CHARGE 6

Seattle's Precinct 1823 counted 343 ballots, which is 71 more ballots than the 272 voters who cast them. This is the single largest discrepancy between ballots and voters in all of King County. Nearly all of the discrepancy is due to "provisional ballots". Mr. Reed was aware of this serious inconsistency before the date of certification.

CHARGE 7

In violation of WAC 434-262-080, WAC 434-262-090 and WAC 434-262-100, Mr. Reed accepted, as complete, the abstract of votes from 24 counties even though they did not provide all the material required by statute and regulations.

CHARGE 8

Reed violated RCW 29A.04.610 by failing to perform many of the duties detailed therein, including;

A) Failure to examine and test voting systems for certification;
B) Failure to employ standards and procedures to ensure the accurate tabulation and canvassing of ballots;
C) Failure to ensure consistency among the counties of the state in the preparation of ballots, the operation of vote tallying systems, and the canvassing of primaries and elections;
D) Failure to ensure procedures to receive and distribute voter registration applications by mail;
E) Failure to engage in the testing, approval, and certification of voting systems;
F) Failure to enforce standards and procedures to prevent fraud and to facilitate the accurate processing and canvassing of absentee ballots and mail ballots;
G) Failure to enforce uniformity among the counties of the state in the conduct of absentee voting and mail ballot elections;
H) Failure to implement standards and procedures to accommodate out-of-state voters, overseas voters, and service voters;
I) Failure to enforce procedures for conducting a statutory recount;

CHARGE 9

Failure to withhold certification of the third, final and manual recount of the November 2, 2004 election, an election he knew was wrought with violations of election laws and regulations.

ACTS OF MALFEASANCE, MISFEASANCE AND/OR VIOLATION OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S OATH OF OFFICE

The above acts of malfeasance, misfeasance and/or violation of the Secretary of State’s Oath of Office, as defined in RCW29A.56.110 (1), (a), (b), (2), occurred between November 3, 2003 and January 5,2005, and constituted a failure to perform the Secretary of State’s duties as detailed in RCW 29A.04.610 and in violation of RCW 42.20.100, RCW 42.20.040, RCW 42.20.050 and RCW 9A.80.010.

In spite of his personal knowledge of election law violations, violations of election statutes and regulations and his failure to employ said laws and regulations, Sam Reed certified the third and manual recount of the November 2, 2004 Washington State General Election.

A duty to uphold and employ election laws and regulations is enjoined upon the Secretary of State, his willful neglect to perform this duty and his certification of an election that he knew was wrought with election law violations, was an act of malfeasance, misfeasance and/or violation of the Secretary of State’s Oath of Office, and violated the public trust.

WARNING (as prescribed in RCW 29A.72.140)

Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, signs this petition when he or she is not a legal voter, or makes any false statement on this petition may be punished by fine or imprisonment or both.

We, the undersigned citizens and legal voters of the State of Washington, respectfully direct that a special election be called to determine whether or not Sam Reed, Washington State Secretary of State, be recalled and discharged from his office, for and on account of his having committed the act or acts of malfeasance, and/or misfeasance while in office, and/or having violated his oath of office in the above cited particulars.

Each of us for himself or herself says: I have personally signed this petition; I am a legal voter of the State of Washington in the precinct and city (or town) and county written after my name, and my residence address is correctly stated, and to my knowledge, have signed this petition only once.

Verification

We verify that we believe the above charges to be true and that we have knowledge of the alleged facts upon which the stated grounds for recall are based.

We declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct and was executed by each of us this 17th day of January, 2005 in Seattle, Washington.